Skip to main content

Full text of "Antigonos Gonatas"

See other formats

Digitized by tine Internet Arciiive 

in 2009 witii funding from 

Ontario Council of University Libraries 


. Per! la, Theobvens<? 










O.M., LiTT.D. 



No special history of the Antigonids, or of any of them, 
exists, though Dr. Beloch 3^ears ago pointed out both the 
omission and the opportunity. The present work attempts 
to fill one part of the gap ; it purports to give, from 294 to 
240 B.C., the history of Macedonia and Greece, treated in 
relation to one central figure. Such a scheme necessaril}^ 
means that some things of importance are passed over lightl}^ 
while others, it may be of no greater importance^ are elabo- 
rated at length : but I hope that the book has thereby secured 
a certain unity of purpose and treatment. No doubt it is 
against modern tendency to cast history round a kernel of 
biography, rather than to use history as the kernel of an essay 
on economics or sociology ; but the latter method of hand- 
hng a subject appears to demand, among other things, that 
one shall first be sure of one's history, and during a large 
part of the third century this is notoriously not the case. 

The only possible way of dealing with this period with an}' 
satisfaction to oneself would be by a series of disconnected 
essa3''s. The attempt to string the fragmentary material to- 
gether as a narrative is almost bound to fail ; for one is often 
compelled to write, not what one would, but what one can. 
But it ma}^ perhaps be some justification of the narrative form 
that so much here has still to be done merely in the way of 
arranging dry bones, and that the work may perhaps be of 


some use to the writer who shall one day definitely clothe 
those bones with flesh and blood. 

It is possible that the reader may think that too much has 
been made of the figure of Antigonos. I believe that nothing 
has been put down which cannot be justified from the sources ; 
but of course I claim to interpret the sources in the light of 
what is said in Appendix I, and to treat Aratos, for instance, 
as a hostile witness. Moreover (if I may refer to one matter 
specifically) we have, in Plutarch and elsewhere, the jetsam 
of what ma}' once have been a considerable literature dealing 
with Antigonos' personality ; and as I cannot find that this 
jetsam, and its relation to contemporary philosophic literature, 
has ever been specially or fully studied, it may well be that 
in attempting to use it I have sometimes overshot the mark. 
I do not myself think that my picture of the king differs much 
from that in most German writers, save in greater detail ; but 
what does seem very possible is that I have made a somewhat 
nebulous figure too elaborate and distinct. But I feel this 
about much else in the book ; probabilities may sometimes be 
stated too dogmatically, from sheer w-eariness of the potential 
mood ; had I taken care to express, on every page, the exact 
amount of hesitation I have felt, the proper shade of reserva- 
tion which each statement appeared to demand, the text 
would have been absolutely unreadable. I would rather 
enter here the general caution (unnecessary to scholars), that, 
in the later chapters especially, there is much which is mere 
working hypothesis, liable at an}' moment to be modified or 
abandoned in the light of some new inscription or more 
thoroughgoing analysis. 

For this period as a whole, the labours of many scholars 


have gradualh' evolved some sort of order out of chaos, and 
my debt to them is, naturally, correspondingly great. The 
mass of relevant books and articles is now very considerable, 
and one can only hope that too much of importance has not 
been overlooked. I have done my best to acknowledge my 
obligations as fully as is possible without writing a history of 
the literature of each section of the subject. It is, howev^er, 
inevitable that one should occasionally put down as one's 
own thought what is really a mislaid memory of some one 
else's; and to any one thus piratically- treated I tender full 
apology. But as one sometimes quotes one's predecessors 
only on the points where one disagrees, I desire here to 
acknowledge more explicitly the help derived from two 
works in particular. One, I need hardl}'^ say, is the third 
volume of Dr. Julius Beloch's Griechische Geschichfe, one's 
indispensable base, my admiration for which increases every 
time I use it ; the other, an earlier book, but surel}- one of 
the most stimulating of its kind ever written, is Professor 
Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff s^w/z^c/ws vonKarystos. 
As some parts of this book cover the same ground as 
portions of Professor W. S. Ferguson's Hellenistic Athens, 
I ought perhaps to mention that this book was substantially 
completed before the appearance of the latter work, though it 
has had a thoroughgoing revision since, in the light both of 
Mr. Ferguson's book and of much else. But most of Mr. 
Ferguson's views had been accessible for some time in his 
numerous special studies. The recently published /. G. xi (li) 
reached me while this book was in the press, in time to enable 
me to add some references, but not to recast the first page of 
Appendix XI, part of which the Introduction to that volume 



has rendered superfluous. An important document, which 
appeared just as this book was going to press, is Herr A. 
Mayer's restoration of column V of the Herculanean papyrus 
no. 399, Philodemos nepl t(oi/ ^TmKS>v {PJiilol. 71, 1912, pp. 211, 
226), which bears on Antigonos' doings in 280-277 '> ^^1 ^ 
have been able to do is to indicate in addenda some of the 
questions it raises. 

The genealogical tables are appended for the reader's 
convenience only. They are not, and are not meant to be, 

One word as to the spelling of Greek proper names. The 
wisdom of our fathers has so ordered the English language 
that any satisfactory S3'stem is, I think, impossible. I have 
adopted what I take to be the method put forward in vol. xv 
of the Annual of the British School at Athens, viz. : Greek 
words in Greek form (except y for v before a consonant), 
unless there be an English form. The question of course is, 
what is an English form ; and here I have retained the 
traditional spelling of a few words that are hardly English, 
such as Aetolia, Cyclades, merely because of their excessive 
familiarity. Englishmen are said to love a compromise ; but 
it may be doubted if any two will, in this respect, love quite 
the same one. In one case I have taken advantage of the 
existence of two forms, keeping Ptolemy for the royal house 
of Egypt and using Ptolemaios for others. For non-Greek 
names, such as Gallic, the Latin form is generally employed. 

There remains only the pleasant task of acknowledging 
personal help. I owe a great debt of gratitude to the kind- 
ness of Professor Felix Dtirrbach, of the Universit^^ of 
Toulouse, who not only managed to find time to give me 


much assistance and information with regard to the inscrip- 
tions from Delos, but also lent me copies of the material parts 
of the principal unpublished inventories, and enabled me to 
quote them by the numbering they will bear in /. G. xi. 
Some of them, but not the very important ones of Boulon, 
Menethales, and Akridion, have now appeared in /. G. xi (ii). 
I also desire to thank Professor R. Herzog, of the University 
of Basel, and Messrs. A. J. B. Wace and M. S. Thompson, 
for copies of unpublished inscriptions ; Herr Dressel, Director 
of the Miinzkabinett of the Kaiser-Friedrich Museum, Berlin, 
for a cast of the coin figured as frontispiece ; Mr. A. M. 
Woodward for various suggestions and references ; Mr. G. F. 
Hill for some very welcome help; Mr. D. G. Hogarth for 
some very valuable criticism ; and Mr. Leonard Butler, of 
New College, Oxford, now sixth form master at Cheltenham 
College, for kindly undertaking the thankless task of reading 
the proofs and verif3ang a large number of references. 

W. W. TARN. 

Decetiiber, 191 2. 





Chapter I 
The Teachers of Antigonos 15 

Chapter II 
The Empire of Demetrios on Land . . . • • 37 

Chapter III 
The Empire of Demetrios over the Sea ... 72 

Chapter IV 
The Fall of Demetrios ....... 89 

Chapter V 
Antigonos as Pretender no 

Chapter VI 
The Coming of the Celts ....... 139 

Chapter VII 
Antigonos and Macedonia ....... 167 

Chapter VIII 
Antigonos and his Circle 223 

Chapter IX 
The Reckoning with Pyrrhos 257 

Chapter X 
The First War with Egypt ...... 275 

Chapter XI 
The Lost Years 311 

Chapter XII 
The Second Struggle with Egypt ..... 340 



Chapter XIII 
The Reckoning with Egypt 367 

Chapter XIV 
The Younger Generation 392 

Appendix I 
One View of the Sources. ...... 410 

Appendix II 
On some Athenian Archons 415 

Appendix III 
The Relative Strength of the Monarchies on Land . 424 

Appendix IV 
The Supposed Neutrality of Delos .... 429 

Appendix V 
Who Founded the League of the Islanders? . . 432 

Appendix VI 
Pausanias' Account of the Gallic Invasion . . . 439 

Appendix VII 
The World-position in 273 ...... 442 

Appendix VIII 
Plutarch, PrKRHos, Ciis. 27 to 34 . . . . 447 

Appendix IX 
The Death of Demetrios the Fair ..... 449 

Appendix X 
The Sea-strengths of Egypt and Macedonia . . . 454 

Appendix XI 
Dating by Delian Festivals 458 

Appendix XII 
The Dates of Kos and Andros ..... 461 

Appendix XIII 
The Macedonian Protectorate of the Cyclades . . 466 



INDEX 479 


(Most of the usual ones can be found in the list printed each year at the end 
oi\.\\^ Journal of Hellenic Studies, and are not repeated here.) 

Arnim = Stoicoruni 7>eteruin fragmenta, vol. i (1905), ed. H. von Arnim. 

Beloch = Julius Beloch, Griechische Geschichte (vol. iii, 1904). 

B. Ph. IV. = Berliner Philologisc/ie Wochetischrift. 

Bouche-Leclerq = A. Bouche-Leclerq, Histoire des Lagides (1903-7). 

Ferguson, Athens = W. S. Ferguson, Hellenistic Athens, 191 1. 

Ferguson, Priests = W. S. Ferguson, The Priests ofAsklepios{i()o6, reprinted 

Head^, Head ^ = B. V. Head, Historia Nuinoruin, first and second editions 

(1887 and 1911 ; it is sometimes still necessary to quote the first edition 

for matter omitted in the second merely to gain space). 
I.J. G. = Recueil des Inscriptions juridiques grecques, ed. R. Dareste 

B. Haussoullier, Th. Reinach. 
Journ. Intern. — Journal internatio?tal d'archeologie Jiuniisniatique. 
Kaerst = Julius Kaerst, Geschichte des Jiellenistischen Zeitalters (vol. i, 

1901 ; vol. ii, pt. I, 1909). 
Klotzsch = C. Klotzsch, Epiroiische Geschichte bis zuni Jahre 280 v. Chr. 


Kolbe, Archofiten = W. Kolbe, Die attischen Archonten von 293/2-31/30 
V. Chr. (1908). 

O.G.I.= W. Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci Inscriptio7ies Selectae. 

P. W. = Pauly-Wissowa, Real- Encyclopddie der classischen Altertums%vis- 

R. E. G. = Revue des Etudes grecques. 

R, Ph. = Revue de Philologie. 

Susemihl = F. Susemihl, Geschichtedergriechischen Literaturinder Alexan- 
drine rseit (1892). 

6j'//.^ = W. Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscriptionuw Gi-aecarum (2nd ed.). 

Wilamowitz, Antigonos = U. von Wilamowitz-]\Ioellendorff, Antigonos von 
Karystos {Philologische Ufttersuchungen, iv, 1881). 

W. Kl. Ph. = Wochenschrift Jiir klassische Philologie. 

Polybios is cited according to Th. Biittner-Wobst's numeration in the 
Teubner edition. Classical texts as a rule from the Teubner edition. Dio- 
genes Laertius from Huebner. Wilainowitz's Griechische Literatur from the 
first edition (the second was a reprint, and the third, enlarged, was not 
available to me in time). 



No part of Greek history should come home to us like the 
third century b. c. It is the only period jhat we can i n tjie 
least compare with our own ; indeed, in some ways it is quite 
startlingly modern. We meet with half the things that we 
ourselves do, half the problems that we ourselves know. 
The days of Salamis or of Sophokles are as remote from the 
men of that time as the days of Shakespeare or the Spanish 
Armada from ourselves. All the horizons have widened and 
opened out ; civilization pulsates with new life, and an eager 
desire toTry^ Il things. Almost all the barriers are already 
down. Men may think as they please, speak as they please, 
believe as they please. An astronomer who proclaims that 
the earth goes round the sun risks nothing worse from the 
orthodox than a few hard words. No man's religion is 
any one else's matter, save for a lingering feeling, occasionally 
translated into action by some Government, against any one 
who proclaims himself altogether an atheist, acknowledging 
no god at all. Amid the clash of creeds old and new, soli- 
cited ahke by the philosophies of the West and the more 
intimate worships of the East, each man is free to choose his , 
own guide, whether for this life or another. 

But he is, as a rule, thinking rather of this life than of an}' 
other. For there is so much to be done ; nothing less than 
the conquest, material, social, intellectual, of a whole new 
world. In his desire to master that world, he shrinks from 
no effort, and he achieves. The dark places of the earth 
contract before him ; one langu age now takes him from the 
Rhone to the Indus, from the Caspian to the Cataracts. He 
measures the planet on wlrich he lives ; he is takmg the first 
tentative steps to reduce it to its true insignificance in the 
heavens. He despises its distances. A modern general 
might hesitate to raid Babylon from a base in Syria, as did 


Demetrios ; a modern contractor might think twice about 
bringing five hundred fighting elephants overland from the 
Punjab to the Mediterranean, as did Seleukos. And while 
Pyrgoteles of Cyprus is building that triakonteres which no 
niodern shipyard would care to try and reconstruct, a philo- 
sopher is asking how it would affect man, could he fly. 

Socially, the man of the third century creates with both 
hands. His world, like ours, is a complex of states, big and 
little, almost all bound together by the tie of one dominant 
civilization. Asiatic peoples too are adopting that civihzation ; 
Asiatic men are thronging to his universities. Every form 
of constitution shall be experimented with ; and the little 
orthodox republics see Kingship stand forth as a vital forma- 
tive principle and Federalism take to itself new scope and 
activity ; see too, as we see to-day, an experiment in the 
combination of both. Here and there, timidly emerging from 
Federalism, and doomed to be stifled almost as soon as born, 
can be traced what looks like the germ of representative 
government itself. The balance of power has become a 
reality and a preoccupation; and because the sea unites, 
every State turns its thoughts to the sea. The great land 
powers are taking eagerly to the water ; and the Govern- 
ments are contending with each other in the provision of 
larger and ever larger warships. But while war at sea, with 
its triple risj^ of steel, fire, and water, is no less terrible than 
it has always been,— danger, ran the proverb, is the forward 
bench of the fighting galley, — war on land, though still half of 
the business of mankind, is gradually losing something of its 
pristine horror. The old rules indeed survive, but a strict 
application of them to the vanquished now raises fierce 
protest. Arbitration has taken on a new spirit, and is rapidly 
gaining upon war ; and though there is no Geneva Conven- 
tion, there is a great and growing movement at work to 
exempt temple after temple and town after town from liability 
to attack, to create a series of centres of immunity. National 
and social antipathies are still plentiful enough and fierce 
enough ; but in their despite a few have already begun to 
preach the brotherhood of man. With the brotherhood of 
man comes the emancipation of woman ; queens apart, it 


moves slowly as yet, but it moves ; and no one will ever 
more openly defy more conventions than the well-to-do and 
respectable Hipparchia. 

Intellectually, the movement is all toward reality, to get 
closer to actual life as lived by men, not in this or that 
compartment of their existence, but in every way possible. 
Imperfect as yet, and cumbered with much rubbish, naturally ; 
but men's faces are set in the right direction. The best brains 
are at work on two very great things : one is the philosophy 
of conduct, of which something will have to be said later ; the 
other i s physical science . Science has indeed thrown wide 
her gates ; her disciples are numerous and devoted ; insatiable 
is men's thirst for the fact. There is ever3'thing to know, 
and some of it becomes known ; it is but a few years since 
a third-century text-book was still used in English schools. 
.\nd with science comes much else. There is a neyv outburst 
o f poetry , pouring itself into many strange moulds and 
unaccustomed forms, but always with that one aim, to get 
closer to some aspect of life. The old formal oratory^jhe 
grand style, is passing awa}', as to-day ; men have too much 
to do for set speeches. There are various schools of histor}^ 
and much debate as to how it should be written ; and if but 
few of its exponents are prepared to sacrifice everything to 
the truth, that too has a flavour, if not of to-day, at any rate of 
yesterday. Universities, — properly incorporated and endowed 
societies for the worship of the Muses, — are in full working 
order. Scholarship is already held in honour ; here is 
Dryasdust, — Chalkenteros they will presently call him, — there 
the first Corpus of Inscriptions; the Homeric question shyl}^ 
dawns on the sacrilegious Separatists. Expert wars with 
expert, and rejoices. In one sphere, philosophy, the popu- 
larizer is already at work, giving attractive lectures for those 
who have not the time, or the inclination, for real study, and 
preaching in all its glory the modern gospel of the short cut. 
It takes, at times, something of an effort to realize that this 
world is, after all, alien and far distant ; a world in which our 
industrialism was replaced by slavery, in which no sea and 
few coasts were ever safe from the slave-raider, and half 
mankind lived a travesty of a life ; a world in which, in place 

B 2 


of great machines, there were giants, men grown so great 
that their fellow men could only express it by worshipping 
them as gods ; strangest perhaps of all, a world of ^yhichJh^e 
rulers, rough soldiers whose thrones had been_wqn^ by their 
own or their fathers' swords, generally held wealth or long 
descent in less honour than intellectual distinction. 
-AC The record^f thi s world is a wr eck, the worst wreck in all 
Greek history. For eighty years we have no attempt at a 
continuous narrative, unless such wretched stuff as Justin's 
compilation can be dignified by that name ; for large sections 
of these eighty years we have no attempt at a narrative at all. 
Even the epigraphical material is sometimes wasted through 
utter uncertainty where to place it. But it was not always so. 
If some part of that eighty years seems never to have been 
covered b}' any really good narrative, so far at least as 
concerns Macedonia, for another part of it the material was 
once abundant and of good quality, indeed almost uniquely 
so." It still remains for some one to investigate the causes 
which have led to this very complete destruction of the 
history of the third century, and to ascertain whether it may 
not be the case that some part of the loss is not entirely 
due to accident. 
"" Of the third-century kings, Antigonos Gonatas is undoubt- 
edly the most interesting. For he was a good deal more than 
the second founder of the Macedonian monarch}', the head of 
the dynast}' that for over a century shielded Greek civilization 
from the flood of northern barbarism, till Rome was able and 
willing to take up the work. He was the one monarch before 
Marcus Aurelius whom philosophy could definitely claim as 
her own, and to whom she could and did look to translate 
^nto fact what she envisaged as theory. And the curious 
cy^ thing about Antigonos' reign is, that the scraps and fragments 
lof our tradition, mutilated as it is, do nevertheless combine, 
not into larger scraps and fragments, but into a sort of definite 
whole ; and it is as a whole that the attempt is made here to 
represent it. This is the sufficient reason for treating it by 
itself; in any general history of the period its unity must, and 
does, become obscured. It is, too, only of very recent years 

^ See App. I. 


that new material from Delos has enabled us to form any 
idea, however imperfect, of this reign in its relations to the 

The natural starting-point is the year 294, when Demetrios -* 
became king of Macedonia, rather than the year 288, when he ^ 
was expelled from that country. But Antigonos' own activity 
dates from before 294 ; and as regards the relations of the 
Antigonid dynasty to the sea, the events of the years 315 to 
245 form one connected whole. It may be advisable, therefore, 
while treating 294 as the starting-point, to give here a very 
brief outline of the fortunes of Antigonos' house from the 
death of Alexander; as regards the sea, certain points in this 
outline will have to be filled in later. 

Alexander died at Babylon in the summer of 323. He left 
no heir to his huge empire, but his queen Roxane was 
expecting the birth of a child : a regency was formed under 
Perdikkas, to whom he had, when already past speech, given 
his ring. Owing to the action of the army, the kingship 
became vested jointly in two persons, Philip Arrhidaios, an 
illegitimate half-witted son of Philip II, and the son, Alexander, 
to whom Roxane soon aftei'wards gave birth. Antipatros, 
the contemporary and trusted minister of Philip II, continued 
to govern Macedonia and so much of Greece as was Mace- 
donian, as he had done during Alexander's lifetime ; while 
Krateros, the best loved of Alexander's generals, received 
the special office of ' protector of the kingdom of Philip ', 
a post of which the meaning is obscure. But irreconcilable 
differences lost no time in showing themselves among the 
generals. Perdikkas made himself unpopular ; and matters 
came to a head in the autumn of 322, when Antigonos the\,\roohi^Vic(stv 
One-eyed, satrap of Phrygia, had to fly for his life from the 

Antigonos, like Antipatros, belonged to an older generation 
than that of Alexander. The tradition says that he was not 
even a member of the Macedonian aristocracy, but was 
a yeoman farmer ; - and the tradition may be true, for, in 

Ael. V.H. 12, 43, ni^Tou/j-yoy ; cf. Diod. 21, I, e^ iSi&iTou -yewJ/iffoy hvvaaTr\^, 
which shows that he was «^/ of illustrious birth, as Droysen {Hcllenismus'^ 
1,87 ) supposed. 


spite of his enormous ability, Alexander had not taken him 
with him to the conquest of Asia, but had left him behind 
as governor of the not particularly important province of 
Phr3'gia, Antigonos now fled to Antipatros ; and when, in 
the spring of 321, Krateros fell in battle, Antigonos sought 
and obtained for his son Demetrios the hand of Antipatros' 
daughter Phila, Krateros' widow. Of this marriage, which 
must have taken place in the winter of 321/0, were born two 
children ; a son Antigonos, called Gonatas, and a daughter 

On the murder of Perdikkas in the spring of 321 Antipatros 
became regent of the empire. He meant honestly by the 
kings, and had them brought to Europe ; to every one else, 
unless it was to the Greek Eumenes, who now led the 
remains of Perdikkas' party, they were onl}^ pawns in the 
game. In the summer of 321 Antipatros made a new dis- 
tribution of provinces, and, among other things, restored 
Antigonos to his Phr3'gian satrapy, considerably enlarged, 
with the commission to carry on the war against Eumenes ; 
this gave Antigonos control of a large army. Antipatros 
himself died in 319, a blow to Alexander's house that nothing 
could make good. He nominated as his successor in the 
regency Polyperchon, a good soldier but an incapable states- 
man ; Antipatros has been blamed for his selection, but in 
fact he had little choice, for the ambitions of the more capable 
men were too manifest. The struggle between Antigonos and 
Eumenes, who was supported by Polyperchon in Macedonia, 
was waged with varying success, and lasted till the winter 
of 316, when Antigonos captured Eumenes and had him 
executed ; this success left Antigonos at the head of a de- 
voted army of veterans and in the strongest single position 
of any one of the Successors. He practically controlled Asia 
from the Hellespont to India. 

Great changes had meanwhile taken place in the position 
of the royal family in Europe. Antipatros' son Kassandros 
had successfully established himself in Macedonia, and Philip 
Arrhidaios, or rather his ambitious wife Eurydike acting in 
his name, had in 317 purported to depose Polyperchon from 
the regency and to nominate Kassandros in his place. There- 


upon Polyperchon called to his aid Alexander's terrible 
mother, the Epeirot Olympias, who had been kept in the 
background while Antipatros lived. She saw in Philip's 
existence an insult to herself and a threat to her grandson, 
whom she was read}' to champion. Her name was still a 
power in Macedonia; supported by Aiakides of Epeiros, she 
entered the country in Kassandros' absence ; the Mace- 
donians refused to fight against her, and she seized and 
murdered Philip and Eurydike and many of Kassandros' 
friends. But Kassandros was too strong for the coalition ; 
he captured Olympias, together with Roxane and her son ; 
and sentence passed by the army ended the old queen's life. 
It is said that the proud woman refused to plead her cause, 
and that Kassandros could find none to execute the sentence 
but the actual relatives of the men she had murdered. 

Two tendencies had been clearly manifested among the"" ^ 
Successors from the beginning. There were those who, like>j 
Ptolemy, the satrap of Egypt, saw clearly that the huge 
shapeless empire, nominally the heritage of an infant and 
an idiot, must break into fractions, and resolved to obtain 
a definite fraction as a kingdom for themselves. There were 
those, on the other hand, who desired, whether genuinely 
(as Antipatros and doubtless Eumenes), or as a colourable 
pretence (as Perdikkas), to attempt to hold the empire together 
for the kings. A third tendency was now to show itself, in 
the person of Antigonos ; a desire to grasp the whole 
inheritance of Alexander for himself, without any reference 
to the royal family at all. In fact, as soon as Eumenes 
was disposed of, Antigonos' inordinate ambition at once 
became visible, and led to a coalition against him in 315 of 
Ptolemy, Kassandros, and Lysimachos, satrap of Thrace. 
Four years of hard but indeterminate fighting followed ; the 
most important event was the restoration by Ptolemy 
of Seleukos to his satrapy of Babylon, from which he had 
been driven by Antigonos. In 311 the war ended in a general 
but short-lived peace. 

The results of ten years' constant warfare on a great scale 
were by now taking shape. Polyperchon, though still con- 
trolling an army, had lost all authority and could do no more 


than maintain himself in the Peloponnese. The great satraps 
had become kings in all but name; the smaller men were 
nearly all eliminated, and fiye__definite_xea.lms were taking 
shape. The far-seeing Ptolemy was firmly established in 
PIgypt, with his capital at Alexandria. Babylon, and the east 
beyond the Euphrates, appeared definitely to be_Seleuko^' ; he 
was building himself a new capital, Seleukeia on the Tigris. 
Lysimachos of Thrace had formed a strong realm in the 
north, with its centre in the Thracian Chersonese, where he 
was soon to build himself a new capital, Lysimacheia. Kas- 
sandros held Macedonia, and had brought part of Greece, 
Including Athens, under his sway ; he had built himself 
a new capital, Kassandreia, on the spot where Potidaia had 
once stood. In the centre of these four states lay the huge 
realm of Antigonos. He held S^'ria and the Asiatic provinces 
from the Hellespont to Eg3^pt, from the Euphrates to the 
Mediterranean ; at sea he had the strongest fleet ; and he 
could strike where he would at the circle about him. But it 
was a circle ; he was ringed in. 

The 3'ear after the peace saw the end of the nominal king- 
ship of Alexander's son ; he and his mother, Roxane, were 
murdered b}' Kassandros. None living was likely to strike 
an honest blow for the house of Alexander. In spirit it was 
dead already; Kassandros only translated thought into action. 
The odium fell on him alone ; all alike reaped the benefit. 
Antigonos' position, in particular, became absolutel}^ clear. 
Whether he was deliberately aiming at the sole dominion of 
the whole empire or not, the other rulers certainl}^ believed 
that he was, and believed that his ambition threatened their 
very existence. All drew together in face of the coming 

In 307 the storm burst. Antigonos' son Demetrios, now 
a man of twenty-nine or thirt}^, sailed for Greece with a great 
force, swept Kassandros out of Athens and the Megarid, and 
received the warmest of welcomes from the Athenian demo- 
cracy. In 306, while Antigonos was building his new capital 
in Syria, Antigoneia on the Orontes, Demetrios turned his 
attention to Ptolemy; with a fleet 118 strong he sailed for 
Cyprus, and audaciously blockaded the Egyptian fleet of 


60 ships in the harbour of Salamis with only 10 galleys, 
while with the remainder he put to sea to meet the relieving 
fleet of 140 ships, which was being brought up by Ptolemy 
in person. In the ensuing battle Demetrios succeeded in 
putting into practice at sea a version of the tactics introduced 
by Epameinondas on land ; massing his strength on his left 
wing, he crushed Ptolemy's right, and then turned success- 
fully against the centre ; the Egyptian fleet was all but anni- 
hilated, and the squadron in Salamis surrendered. Demetrios 
never had again to fight at sea. His father and he each 
took the title of king ; for the moment it must have seemed 
that the}' held the destinies of the world in their hands. An 
invasion of Egypt by land and sea followed, but Fortune 
turned her face, and the undertaking failed ; while the next 
year, 305, was wasted over the siege of Rhodes, an heroic 
struggle that brought no less renown to Demetrios the 
Besieger than to the stubborn and successful islanders, but 
of which the results, from Antigonos' point of view, were 
quite incommensurate with the expenditure of men, material, 
and time. Peace was not made with Rhodes till 304; and 
the delay enabled Kassandros to advance and lay siege to 
Athens, while Polyperchon was conquering the Peloponnese. 
Demetrios, whose energy at this period of his life was not 
inferior to that of Alexander himself, flew back to Greece ; 
he drove off Kassandros, and by 303 had conquered Boeotia, 
mid-Greece, and a large part of the Peloponnese. There- 
upon he carried out two measures of great political impor- 
tance ; he married the Epeirot princess Deidameia, sister of 
Pyrrhos, who as a child had been selected to be the future 
bride of Alexander's son and empress of the world ; and he 
revived the League of Corinth, the league which Philip II 
had founded, and at whose head Alexander had conquered 
Asia. The Greek states, assembled at the Isthmus, elected 
Demetrios general by sea and land in the war against 
Kassandros ; armed with this mandate, he invaded Thessaly 
in the next year; the conquest of Macedonia looked but 
a question of time. Time, however, wa^; the one thing no 
longer at Demetrios' disposal. While he had tarried over 
the siege of Rhodes, the fate of his house had been settled 


on the banks of the Indus. Seleukos of Babylon, unable 
to make head against Chandragupta, the new monarch of 
a united Northern India, had come to terms ; he had ceded 
his provinces along the Indus, which doubtless he could not 
have held in any case, in return for 500 trained war elephants. 
The beasts were successfully marched across Asia, and 
with their arrival the crisis came. Antigonos was ringed 
b}^ a world in arms; Seleukos was moving against him from 
the east, L3'simachos from the north ; Ptolemy from the 
south was invading Hollow Syria. He was forced to recall 
Demetrios from Europe ; and Demetrios, hastily arranging 
a truce with Kassandros, returned to Asia. Kassandros 
succeeded in throwing across some of his troops to the aid 
of Lysimachos ; and the king of Thrace, his army thus 
stiffened, b}^ a series of brilliant marches outmanoeuvred 
Antigonos, who sought to crush him while unaided, and 
effected his junction with Seleukos. Demetrios, too, had 
joined his father; and in the late summer of 301, at Ipsos in 
Phr3^gia, the two armies met in one of the great struggles of 
history, to decide the fate of half the world. Antigonos is 
said to have had over 70,000 infantr}', 10,000 cavalry, and 
75 elephants ; Seleukos and Lysimachos had 64,000 foot, 
10,500 horse, 120 chariots, and 480 elephants. Demetrios, 
charging at the head of the cavalry massed on the left wing, 
as usual scattered his immediate opponents; doubtless he 
designed to repeat the victorious tactics of Salamis. But 
he found, as so many cavalry leaders in antiquity found, 
that a great mass of horsemen, riding without stirrups, and 
once fairly launched, could not, like galleys, be turned at 
a signal ; the impetus of his men swept him on too far ; and 
he returned to find the battle over. Seleukos' elephants had 
trampled out the hopes of the house of Antigonos ; the old 
king himself lay dead on the lost field. 

No longer king of kings, Demetrios fled with a small force 
to Ephesos, and sailed for Europe, giving up Asia as lost, 
save for a few fortresses ; while Seleukos and Lysimachos 
divided the Asiatic empire of Antigonos, on terms that 
Lysimachos took the provinces to the north of Tauros and 
Seleukos those to the south, except Kilikia, which was given 


to Kassandros' brother, Pleistarchos. Demetrios turned first 
to Athens, the city where six years before he had been wel- 
comed as a deliverer and worshipped as a god; there he had 
left his treasure, his ships, and his wife Deidameia; in the 
goodwill of Athens was sure refuge. The Athenians sent 
Deidameia to Megara, handed over the ships and the treasure, 
and closed their gates upon the fugitive : it is recorded that 
the Besieger felt this as a worse blow than the field of Ipsos. 
With Athens went Euboea and central Greece ; but Deme- 
trios' garrisons saved for him Corinth and a good deal of 
the Peloponnese, while his command of the sea was still 
absolute. Leaving his brother-in-law, Pyrrhos, the future 
king of Epeiros. to command for him in Greece, he sailed 
at the head of his fleet to the Thracian Chersonese, and 
there succeeded in inflicting some damage on Lysimachos, 
who was his irreconcilable personal enemy, and whom he 
bitterly hated. Lysimachos, a very good soldier with a 
reputation for meanness, had come off ver}^ well in the 
division of Antigonos' kingdom ; he was on good terms with 
Kassandros, and Ptolemy, whose daughter, Arsinoe, he was 
presently to marry, was already making advances to him. 
For Ptolemy had sent no troops to Ipsos, but had occupied 
Hollow Syria while the other kings were fighting ; and as 
he had no intention of returning it to Seleukos, to whom b}' 
right it belonged, he was looking for friends against a possible 
day of reckoning. Seleukos suddenly found himself isolated 
in the face of an informal league of Ptolemy, Lysimachos, 
and Kassandros ; and as he could not take direct measures 
against Ptolemy, to whom he had lately owed both life and 
kingdom, he looked about for a makeweight, and found it 
in Demetrios. 

The alliance of the two was celebrated at Rhossos in Syria 
with great ceremon}^ Demetrios summoned Phila to join 
him, and gave their daughter, Stratonike, in marriage to 
Seleukos ; Seleukos feasted him in his camp, and he Seleukos 
on his flagship, the largest vessel of war yet known. In 
spite of his possessions in Greece and the islands — he still 
held Cyprus and the islands of the Aegean, and soon after 
reconquered Kilikia — Demetrios' true kingdom now was his 


overwhelming fleet, based on a few great fortresses— Corinth, 
Ephesos, T3Te, Sidon. But kingship at this time was a 
matter that was personal and not territorial ; it resided in 
the individual dynast ; the particular country which that 
individual ruled was quite an accidental matter. The essential 
thing here was the man Demetrios, who had ruled a great 
realm before, and might do so again. Seleukos and Deme- 
trios sent a joint embassy to Ephesos, and no doubt to the 
other cities that still held to Demetrios, announcing the 
alliance ; and Seleukos showed his appreciation of Demetrios' 
real position as a sea-king by dedicating to Apollo of Delos 
two silver models of war-vessels, in honour of the share he 
had gained in the kingdom of the sea,-"' He also brought 
about peace between Demetrios and Ptolemy ; but whether 
the other kings recognized Demetrios as again king of a 
fifth realm beside their own may be doubted. 

However, this arrangement did not last long. In 297 the 
balance of power was rudely upset by the death of Kas- 
sandros ; his eldest son, Philip, who succeeded him, was 
consumptive, and died soon after. About the same time, 
too, Demetrios and Seleukos fell out, apparently over a 
refusal of Demetrios to sell to Seleukos Tyre and Sidon, 
which he held with strong garrisons. The result was a 
recrudescence of the great war of 302/1. Ptolemy, Seleukos, 
and Lysimachos formed a new combination, with the object 
of annexing and dividing up everything that Demetrios still 
held in Asia : Ptolemy acquired Cyprus, Seleukos Kilikia, 
Lysimachos Ephesos and other towns, leaving to Demetrios 
only a few scattered fortified places — Tyre, Sidon, Miletos, 
Kaunos. On the other hand, Demetrios crossed to Europe, 
apparently with the object of renewing the undertaking that 
he had been compelled to break off in 302, before Ipsos. 
Which came first in time, the coalition against him or his 
attack on Athens, cannot be said; but in 295 he appeared 
with a great fleet before Athens, ruled at the moment by 
Kassandros' friend Lachares as tyrant, and formed the siege 
of the city. No doubt he was invited by his friends within 
the walls. An attempt by Ptolemy to relieve the city failed, 

^ See ch. 3, n. 36. 


and after a heroic resistance Athens, in the first half of 294, 
was starved into surrender. Demetrios showed ever}' kind- 
ness to the citizens, and poured in corn as fast as possible ; 
but he made sure of the future by garrisoning the Mouseion 
and Mounychia. Perhaps now, perhaps a little later, he also 
recovered Euboea. 

Demetrios already held a good deal of the Peloponnese ; 
and in 295, before forming the blockade of Athens, he had 
attacked and been beaten off from Messene. He now 
attacked Sparta, but was recalled b}- an opening in the 
north. Kassandros' two younger sons, Antipatros and Alex- 
ander, had divided Macedonia, and were fighting. Anti- 
patros, the elder, who had married a daughter of L^'simachos, 
and perhaps was supported by him, murdered his mother 
Thessalonike, the last surviving daughter of the great Phihp, 
for favouring his brother; whereon Alexander sought help 
from P3Trhos, now king of Epeiros, and Demetrios. Pyrrhos 
arrived first, drove off Antipatros, and installed Alexander 
as king, receiving or taking a large cession of territory' in 
return for his assistance. Demetrios came up too late to 
influence the arrangement ; Alexander received him with 
courtesy, but explained that he no longer required his help ; 
and Demetrios, accompanied by Alexander, retraced his 
steps to Larisa in Thessal}'. What happened there is quite 
uncertain. The version of events that afterwards found 
favour at the court of Pella was, that Alexander laid a plot 
to assassinate Demetrios, and that the latter discovered and 
anticipated the treacherous act. Another version, which 
perhaps originated at Lysimacheia, says that there was no 
plot, but that Antipatros' father-in-law, Lysimachos, had 
effected a reconciliation between the brothers, which would 
have checkmated Demetrios' designs. It is hardly worth 
remarking that a statement about Demetrios originating from 
Lysimachos' court is absolutely' valueless. All that is certain 
is the crude fact, that Alexander at a banquet was cut down 
by Demetrios' guards, and that his arm}', probably tampered 
with beforehand, thereon hailed Demetrios as ' king of the 
Macedonians', and escorted him over the border into Mace- 
donia. There was no resistance ; Antipatros escaped to 


Lysimachos ; ■* and Demetrios was once again king of a 
great kingdom. 

* Diod. 21, 7 and Plut. Afor. 530 c say that Antipatros was assassinated 
by Demetrios ; Justin 16, I, 19 (cf. 16, 2, 4) and Eiiseb. p. 231 (Schoene) say 
that he escaped to Lysimachos, and was put to death by him later ; Paus. 
9, 7, 3 is ambiguous. Probably we have here again the conflicting versions 
of Lysimacheia and Pella. A priori, Diodoros is most likely to represent 
Hieronymos and the facts ; but he has not much more than an allusion, and 
Droysen and Beloch follow without a question the more circumstantial story 
in Justin. If the Antipatros of Laches' decree for Demochares be this 
Antipatros, as generally supposed (ch. 4, p. 102), this would show that Justin 
is right. 



Antigonos, called Gonatas,^ son of Demetrios the Besieger 
and of Phila, was in all probability born at the end of 320 
or early in 319,^ when Demetrios was a mere boy of seven- 
teen. The moralists of a later time were accustomed to"" 
quote him as an example of how a man might, by his own 
conduct, avoid being visited with the sins of his forefathers." 
And indeed his forefathers had passed on to him a mixed^ 

Few families possessed such a consistent record of crime 
and misfortune as that of his grandfather Antipatros. Of 
those of the numerous sons and daughters of the regent 
whose careers are known to us, not one enjoyed good 
fortune.'* Kassandros, for all his high political ability, was 

^ Meaning unknown, except that Porphyry's explanation, ' man of Gonnoi,' 
is wrong (Euseb. i, 237, Schoene) : — Demetrios had no connexion with 
Gonnoi in 320, and the ethnic, which is common enough, is Towevs ; see, 
beside the coins, S_y//." 453 = G. D.I. 3205 ; G. D.I. 3286 ; B. C.H. 1900, 
p. 85. Porphyry may have confused Vowoi. and yoira (Steph. Byz. s.v. 
Vovvoi, yovva yap oi AioXety ra yovara), and hence his blunder; but it is 
Strange that Schoene's text gives Pofois, a form which L. Dindorf in Steph. 
/. f. deduced ought to exist somewhere. Anyhow, if the word is Greek, the 
two possible connexions appear to be yovi], yfvea-dm (? ' first-born'), and -yo'w, 
' knock-kneed ' or something of the sort. This latter was suggested by 
L. Dindorf, s.z'. TovaTus, and is preferable to Niebuhr's view (A'/. Schriften, 
p. 228), that yavaTas was a piece of armour covering the knee ; for there is an 
.old tradition in favour of Dindorf s view, though apparently he did not know 
this ; the Latin translation appended to Theon of Alexandria's life of Aratos 
(given by E. Maass, Covimenhirzoricin in Araium rcliqiiae^ 1898, p. 146 seq. ; 
Theon's life = No, 3 in VVestermann, ^loypucfioi) translates Gonatas by Geni- 
culosus. This may be correct, and if so it may be a soldier's nickname, like 
Caligula. But it may not be a Greek word at all. Curiously enough, O. Hoff- 
mann, Die Makedonen, p. 193, follows Porphyry without comment. 

'^ His death in 240/39 is certain. [Lucian], Macrob. 11, makes him eighty 
at the time ; Porphyry (Euseb. i, 237, Schoene), eighty-three. The former is 
probably correct, for Phila's marriage must be connected with the restoration 
of the elder Antigonos by Antipatros ; but the authority given for it, Medios, 
is not known. He was not, of course, Medeios of Larisa. 

^ Plut, Mor. 562 F. * See the genealogical tables. 


execrated throughout Greece as a ' tyrant ', and more than 
execrated in Macedonia as the butcher of the old ro3^al 
house ; and histor}^ chose to remember him, not as the 
founder of Salonika, but as the murderer of the mother, the 
wife, and the son of the great Alexander. Of Kassandros' 
sons, one murdered his mother, the last of Philip's daughters ; 
another was murdered ; both alike lost their kingdom. To 
Antipatros' three daughters, Phila, Eurydike, Nikaia, the 
fates gave even less. Of Phila's tragic life we shall speak 
presently. Eurydike was married to Ptolemy I, the able 
king of an established kingdom ; she lived to be supplanted 
by her own maid of honour, to see herself repudiated and 
her son disinherited of his crown ; one of her daughters, 
Lysandra, was married to Kassandros' ill-fated son Alex- 
ander, and after his death to the no less ill-fated Agathokles, 
while her exiled son, Ptolemy Keraunos, is known chiefly 
as the murderer of his benefactor Seleukos and of the sons 
of his half-sister Arsinoe, and as the prince whose folly let 
the flood of Celtic invasion sweep through Macedonia. 
Nikaia, having been married to and perhaps repudiated by 
the ill-fated Perdikkas, was next married to Lysimachos of 
Thrace ; her son Agathokles was murdered by his father, and 
of her daughters, Eurydike was married to Kassandros' son, 
the matricide Antipatros, and Arsinoe to Ptolemy H of Egypt, 
to be repudiated, much as her aunt Eurydike before her, 
in favour of her quondam step-mother Arsinoe Philadelphos. 
It is a dreary chronicle ; the superstitious might be forgiven 
for supposing that a member of Antipatros' house started life 

_ at a considerable disadvantage. 

There was, however, another side to the shield ; and Anti- 
gonos, if on the mother's side he inherited a fair share of mis- 
fortune, inherited also a great deal of character and political 
wisdom. Antipatros may not have been an attractive figure, 
— it was of course inevitable that Greek tradition should be 
something less than just to the conqueror in the Lamian war 
and the cause of the suicide of Demosthenes, — but he is a 
remarkably solid one. The pupil and friend of Aristotle, 

_ a past master in the art of statesmanship, he stood out as 
the wisest of the group of Alexander's generals. While 


Alexander was conquering Asia, there fell to Antipatros the 
difficult and thankless task of securing his rear and holding 
down Greece ; and in the war after Alexander's death, when 
Greece so nearly threw off the Macedonian yoke, on Anti- 
patros fell the odium of the political arrangements made 
in the conquered states.' In politics Antipatros had neither 
illusions nor sentiment. What raises him above the level 
of his contemporaries, many of whom were far more success- 
ful, is this ; that he alone of the Successors refused to 
worship Alexander as a god,*' and that he nevertheless, 
almost alone ot them, kept laitti with Alexander's house. 

Antipatros' political ability and political theories descended 
to Antigonos through his mother Phila. She appears to us 
in brief outline as one of the noblest women of a time when 
the women were generally distinguished, either for good or 
evil. She could by her tact quell a tumult in camp, for she 
knew the right thing to say to each discontented mercenar}^ ; 
j she used to provide marriage portions for the sisters and 
daughters of the men who had nothing ; she often defended 
and obtained the acquittal of others unjustly accused.' 
Married to Krateros, the best beloved of all Alexander's 
generals, his death in battle against Eumenes in 321 left her 
early a widow with one son ; and in the next 3'ear, as part 
of a political arrangement between the old Antigonos and 
Antipatros, she was married to Demetrios. Demetrios was 
at the time a mere boy, — he cannot have been much over 
sixteen,— and it is implied that Phila was not only older but 
considerably older than himself; and his dislike to the 
marriage called forth the frank cynicism of his father, who 
whispered him that people must marry against their inclina- 
tions if they got enough by it.* Phila was incalculably 
superior to her husband. She bore with his innumerable 
infidelities, of which of course the time thought nothing; she 

•' Polyperchon's rescript in the name of Philip Arrhidaios, Diod. i8, 56; 
the reference to the hardships suffered by Greek states at the hands of the 
king's generals aims at .Antipatros. 

* Suidas, 'AfTiTrarpos-, dae^es tovto Kp'ivns. On his policy generally, Kaerst 

II. (I), p. 19- 
^ Phila's portrait, Diod. 19, 59, 3-6 ; (ultimately from Hieronymos). 

* Plut. Dcin. 14. 



bore even with his taking a second and a third legitimate 
wife, which even that easy-going epoch considered scanda- 
lous ; if she left him when he was prosperous and polygamous, 
she returned to him when he was in misfortune, as after 
Ipsos ; she went as his envoy to her brother Kassandros, 
doing her best to keep peace between the two ; and, at 
the last, such acceptance as Demetrios had from the Mace- 
donians as their king was largely due to her as Antipatros' 
daughter. If the comparison of Demetrios with Mark, 
Antony be a stock one, Phila may very justly take her place 
beside the gracious figure of Octavia. 

That Antigonos was the son of his mother rather than of 
his father comes out on every page of his history. He 
had inherited, it is true, from the old Antigonos strength of 
purpose, but none of the overbearing ambition that had 
accompanied it. He possessed also to the full the most 
honourable characteristic of his father's house ; he had the 
same devoted loyalty to Demetrios as Demetrios had had 
to the elder Antigonos.^ But he inherited neither his father's 
genius nor the instability which made that father impos- 
sible. Demetrios was incomparably the most brilliant figure 
of that age of giants. Brave as a hero and beautiful as a 
god;^*^ of such majesty that strangers followed him merely 
to gaze, of such attraction that whole communities spon- 
taneousl}^ worshipped him ; a great mechanician, a great 
admiral, a great leader, of inexhaustible energy and world- 
embracing ideas ; to the superficial eye he had ever3thing 
and more than everything, (save hereditary claim), that had 
belonged to Alexander. But that which in Alexander lay 
hidden beneath the glittering surface was lacking in Deme- 
trios. Demetrios could win hearts but not keep them ; 
conquer kingdoms onl}^ to lose them ; gain victories which 
led no whither; and through his life runs a gradual thread 

» Plut. Dem. 51. 

'" Demochares ap. Athen. 6, 253 c ; Diod. 20, 92, 3. There is a wonderful 
head in the Vatican, with ram's horns, pubhshed by J. Six {Rom. Mitt. 1903, 
p. 212, figs. 2 and 3), which Six called Alexander, but which A. J. B. Wace 
(/. H. S. 1905, p. 87) thinks is a head of Demetrios as Alexander Ammon. 
if it be indeed Demetrios, he must have been about the handsomest man of 
whom any record remains, even allowing for idealization. 


of disillusionment, whereby he who at the beginning had 
expected too much of his fellow men ended by conceding 
them too little, and the king and hero gradually passed 
into the adventurer, till at the last the man who had been 
worshipped as a present deity on earth was hunted down and 
caged like a wild beast, a danger too great even to that 

Antigonos was between eighteen and nineteen years old at\ 
the time of the battle of Ipsos ; but he was in all probability 
not present at the battle. For in 303 Demetrios had married 
the Epeirot princess Deidameia,^^ and Phila's position at his 
court must have become impossible. This marriage, Hke 
the revival in the same year of the League of Corinth, was 
a part of the political combination which he was forming 
against Phila's brother ; it was useful to acquire the possi- 
bility of interference in Epeiros, and still more useful, since 
Kassandros had married Philip's daughter, to be married to 
Alexander's cousin. Deidameia was too important a person for 
the marriage to be looked on in the light of some of Demetrios' 
other unions ; and Phila left him, though she returned to 
him after the disaster of Ipsos. -^- As Demetrios left Deidameia 
in Athens when he sailed for Asia,^^ Phila cannot have re- 
mained there also ; we must conclude that in 303 she, and in 
all probability her son with her, went to Kassandros, perhaps 
(as Octavia in like case) to play the part of peacemaker.^^ 

For the time being, Antigonos was quite eclipsed by the 1 
youthful brilhancy of Deidameia's brother Pyrrhos.^^ The ^ 
young prince of Epeiros, who was nearly a year younger 
than Antigonos, had been brought up an exile at the court of the 
Illyrian prince Glaucias ; and though Glaucias had restored 
him at the age of twelve to his share of Epeirot kingship, 
Pyrrhos had again lost his kingdom in a revolution when 
about seventeen, and betaken himself with his onl}'- remaining 
possession, his sword, to his brother-in-law Demetrios. It 
was the year before Ipsos, and Demetrios welcomed him 

" Plut. Pyrrh. 4. 12 pi^j^ j^^j^^ ,3. '^ lb. 30. 

'^ On Demetrios' polygamy see ch. 2, n. 21. 

15 Pyrriios was born about winter 31 9/8 ; Klolzsch, p. 95, n. i, cf. Beloch 
3, 2. 103. 

C 2 


gladl3\ In the life-long rivalry of Pyrrhos and Antigonos, the 
more precocious Pyrrhos thus gained, and for a long time 
kept, the start ; for while Antigonos was probably not at 
Ipsos at all, P3Trhos had already shown his mettle in this 
his first battle, defeating the forces immediately opposed to 
him.^" He adhered to Demetrios after the defeat, and was 
left by him as his governor in Greece ^^ when he crossed the 
Aegean, Events, however, moved quickly in those troubled 
years. In the year after Ipsos Phila rejoined her husband in 
Asia, bringing with her their daughter Stratonike for the 
celebration of her marriage with Seleukos ; and in the year 
299 Seleukos brought about peace between Demetrios and 
Ptolemy.^^ This ended the association of Pyrrhos and 
Demetrios. Demetrios sent him to Egypt as his hostage, 
where the young man fell completely under the glamour 
of the brilliant court of Alexandria ; and when in 298 
Deidameia died, the last link that bound him to his former 
patron snapped. He attached himself at Alexandria to the 
party of Berenike, and Ptolemy, liking his address, gave him 
the hand of Antigone, Berenike's daughter by her first mar- 
riage, and with money and troops restored him to his king- 
dom on Kassandros' death in 297. Henceforward Pyrrhos 
\was the consistent enemy of the house of Demetrios. 

Phila's return, Pyrrhos' departure, Deidameia's death, 
opened the way for the beginning of Antigonos' political 
career ; and in 296 he is found acting as his father's governor 
in some part of Greece. ^^ He was probably present at the 
siege of Athens in 295/4 J he certainly accompanied his father 
on the expedition which in 294 gave Demetrios the crown of 
I Macedonia."^*^ Henceforward, while Demetrios reigned in 
I. Macedonia, Antigonos governed for him in Greece. 

He had grown up as heir to the greatest throne in the 
world ; and before reaching manhood had seen his house, in 

" Plut. Pyrrh. 5. " lb. 5 ; Dem. 31. i« Plut. Dem. 32. 

^' In the Delian inventory of Phillis I, 1. G. xi, 154, A, 11. 43, 44, there 
is an entry, apparently relating to the Dionysia, ^v\ov ds to^i (f)a[X]X6v napa 
'AvTiyovov AAA. The date being 296, Gonatas is meant ; and such a gift, 
so stated, implies, though it does not actually prove, that he had at the time 
an independent governorship. 

="> Plut. De/;^. 27. 


one day's battle, reduced almost to the condition of fugitives^. 
He had watched his father attempting to rule Greek states by 
sentiment, and had seen the cities, which 3-esterday were 
fawning on and worshipping him, to-day shut their gates in 
his face. Meantime he had been learning from his mother, 
possibly too from Kassandros, something of the policy of the 
old Antipatros, a polic}' stern perhaps and harsh, but based 
on an idea of duty of a kind and absolutely discarding 
every form of sentiment. And he had mastered the fact, to 
be spoken of presently, that the rule of the sea, once secured, 
had endured to Demetrios unshaken by every vicissitude on 
land. Now fortune had again turned her wheel, and at the 
age of twenty-five he stood heir once more to another great 
kingdom. If Antigonos was not by this time absolutely con- 
temptuous of whatever fortune might bring him, it was not>c 
the fault of that goddess. 

What fortune brought him at the moment was teachers.\( 
Plato, in a well-known paradox, had laid it down that for the^ 
world to be well governed philosophers must become kings 
or kings philosophers ; and the world was ripe for experi- 
ment. Never yet had philosophy attained to such a position/ 
as she held at the beginning of the third century ; and if she 
could hardly herself aspire to rule, save as Demetrios of 
Phaleron had ruled Athens, — and philosoph}- as such had no 
concern with an unconstitutional ruler supported by foreigni 
spears, — she could and did aspire to train a king; andi 
Antigonos inevitably offered himself for the attempt."^^ He 
had probably met both Menedem os and Zeno before 301 ; 
but a bo}' of sixteen is perhaps hardly likel}^ toTiave frequented 
with much profit the philosophic schools, and from 301 to 294 
both Athens and Eretria were closed to him. Now, however, 
that Athens and Euboea both formed part of his father's king- 
dom, and were under his personal governorship, the oppor- 
tunity came ; and in Menedemos of ErptHa H p found the man. 

Eretria was a good type of the provincial town that does 

not forget that it has once been greater than provincial. The 

Eretrians remembered that they had once ruled the sea and 

sent out many colonies, and had stood shoulder to shoulder 

^' See ch. 8, p. 254 seq. 


with Athens against the Persian. They remembered their 
early school of art ; and while their old rival, Chalkis, for all 
its splendid public buildings and its famous market-place, had 
become a garrison town of the Antigonids, a great fortress 
and arsenal, at Eretria gathered all elements of culture in the 
island that had not yielded to the enormous centrahzing pull 
of Athens. When at a later date the Romans took the town, 
they found it full of pictures and statues by the old masters 
of a number and quality out of all proportion to its size and 
wealth ;^^ and a school of philosophy went by its name. 
P The centre of cultivated society in Eretria at the time was 
the philosopher Menedemos.^^ An Eretrian by birth, the son 
'either of a master builder or of a scene painter, — his father at 
any rate worked for his living, and Menedemos learnt his 
trade,— he had studied under Stilpon at Megara, in the school 
of Phaidon in Elis, and for a while in Athens, where, like 
Kleanthes after him, he had worked in a mill by night that 
he might by day have food and leisure to attend lectures.^* 
Little esteemed at first in his native town, he soon won the 
highest position there, both politically and socially; he went 
on important embassies,^^ and was elected one of the Pro- 
bouloi, the board of magistrates who in Eretria saw to the 
finances and the foreign relations of the town j^*^ he became 

2- Livy 32, 16, 17. 

" Life of Menedemos in Diog. L. ii, from which all details in the text not 
otherwise noted are taken. A good deal of it comes from Antigonos of 
Karystos ; he was not quite a contemporary, (on the dates, Beloch 3, I, 499, 
n. l), but could perhaps, as a boy, have seen Menedemos. Of modern writers, 
see especially Wilamowitz, Atitigonos, pp. 86-102 and 133-43, and Th. Gom- 
perz, Greek Thinkers (Eng. Trans. 1905), vol. ii, p. 205 seq. I cannot refrain 
from quoting Gomperz's beautiful image : ' Menedemos of Eretria, the philo- 
sopher at the head of a little commonwealth, ... is a figure on which the eye 
of the historian gladly rests, as on a sun-illumined peaceful island in the 
midst of a troubled sea.' 

^■' Athen. 4, 168 a. The statement of Diogenes that Menedemos was also 
Plato's pupil must be due to a confusion with Menedemos Iluppaior. 

^^ To Ptolemy, to Lysimachos, and to Demetrios at least twice, once on 
behalf of his wife's city Oropos, and once in a successful attempt to get the 
taxes imposed on Eretria reduced ; Diog. L. 2, 140. The two former embassies 
are connected by Beloch, 3,2, 301, with the period immediately following the 
battle of Ipsos; the two latter must belong to the period of Demetrios' rule in 

"^^ np6(iov\os, Herakleides Lembos ap. Diog. L. 2, 143. Possibly Antigonos 
of Karystos gave the same thing, to. ofxoin tovtco. Another account (Diog. L. 
2, 137} merely says npova-TTj rrjs TroXiTeins. On the power and consequence of 


the informal head of the Httle commonwealth. The reason of 
his success is not far to seek ; for though he was no great 
thinker, and though his chief claim to the title of 'philosopher' 
must rest on mental' attitude rather than actual teaching, he 
had the one great gift of characte r.-" A well built, rather 
stout man, sun-burnt as an athlete, of straightforward speech 
and biting tongue, he appears before us, not as a searcher 
after wisdom, bu t as_ 3 dignifi ed and cultured man o f the 
world ; a st udent of men, rather than of book s-; one who not 
^TJTrtjr-took the lead in the public life of his native town, but 
who in private gathered round him a notable circle. Indolent, 
and contemptuous of the routine of the schools, with which 
he had little enough in common, he taught, not a host of 
pupils on the ranged benches of a class-room, but a few who 
walked or sat with him informally, as it might chance. His 
spiritual affinities went back behind the schools to Socrates ; 
like him, he wrote nothing and left nothing behind him, 
attempting to stimulate those who came to him b}' conversa- 
tion and question, to call out rather than to impart;" to 
mould each for his own life, rather than all to a pattern. 
The portrait which remains to us is an attractive picture of a 
very human man, one who could inspire love no less than 
fear, — one whose friendship for his friend became proverbial, 
and with whom the mocking speech was often enough 
redeemed by the kindly action.'-' Illdoers feared that mock- 
ing speech, invincible in retort, and apt to go to its point with 
a coarseness of satire as brutal as effective ; while behind it 
lay a nobihty of character that could deter a man from doing 
a dubious act 'lest Menedemos should hear'. His chief 
faults — no great weight in the balance— were perhaps a 

the Trpo/SouXoi at Eretria, see HoUeaux in R. E. G. lo, 1897, pp. 157, 166 (on 
Syll? 277). 

" Gomperz /. c. remarks on the disproportion between Menedemos' repu- 
tation and our knowledge of what that reputation was founded on. The 
solution must be character, personality, a thing hardly to be conveyed upon 

^* See Plato Rep. 7, 518 B: the true function of education is to bring out 
what is in the pupil. Straton the Peripatetic, filling pupils with facts, would 
have it that while his scholars worked those of Menedemos only played 
(Plut. Mor. 472 e). 

^* The story of Alexinos' wife, Diog. L. 2, 136. 


certain measure of pomposity, and too high an opinion of the 
deference due to a philosopher.''" 

It is perhaps at his famous suppers rather than in the 
lecture-room that we see him most clearly.'^^ His friends 
came on to them after dining elsewhere, each bringing his 
own cushion, if he wanted one, to sit on a straw mat in 
summer or a sheepskin in winter and join in a dessert con- 
sisting of a very little fruit and wine and a great deal of 
intellectual conversation. There they would sit on through 
the night, solving the universe, or listening to ' the word that 
chastens those who care to hear V'^ as a poet of the circle put 
it ; cock-crow would not always part them.^' B}^ this last 
phrase we are reminded, — we are no doubt meant to be 
reminded, — of that more famous banquet at which Socrates, 
after the wondrous discourse in praise of love, drank the 
whole company under the table and himself departed soberly 
at cock-crow to his daily work. 

The circle of friends whom Menedemos gathered round 
him was a notable one for a provincial town, as notability- 
went. Hither came the poets Aratos of Solo i, (undistin- 
guished as yet, save perhaps for fiis leaning to Stoicism), and 
Antagoras of Rho rjp^, the friend of the grave heads of the 
Academy: we shall meet both again at Antigonos' court.^^* 
Hither came Dionysios of Herakleia^who was afterwards to 

^^ The Nikokreon episode, ib. 2, 129. — As to pomposity. Parody always 
made Menedemos a very heavy character ; and parody cannot invent, it can 
only exaggerate a real trait ; it must have something to go upon. When 
Krates the Cynic, no friend of his, called him the bull of Eretr-ia (Diog. L. 2, 
126 = Diels, fr. 2), it might refer to a fierce look (see Diels) ; but Timon 
cannot be explained away. In the Fishing of the Philosophers (see chap. 8, 
p. 241), Arkesilaos tries to swim by the aid of 'that lump of lead, Menedemos', 
%X'^v Mfpe8t}iJ.ov vTTo arepvoirn p)\t'/3Soj; — (Wachsmuth emended this, but it is 
obviously a iinpa. Trpoa-SoKinv for some word meaning bladder) — (fr. 31 Diels = 
l5 Wachsmuth) ; and again (fr. 29 D. = 28 W.) Timon speaks of his bulk, 
and calls him supercilious, and o0poo-(/3<!/ij3a^, of which the exact rendering 
would be Serjeant Buzfuz. No doubt Menedemos had soon taken Timon's 
measure, and showed it. 

^' Diog. L. 2, 139 ; repeated with more details, Athen. 10, 4196 ; taken by 
Antigonos of Karystos from Lykophron's Menedemos. 

^- Lykophron ap. Diog. L. 2, 140, 6 {Too(f)povL(Trr)s toU (piXijKuois Xoyof. The 
line as given in Athenaios has a less pointed variant. 

^^ Lykophron ap. Athen. /. c. ; 6 opus KaTeXiifi^ave rijf ew koKSiv' roto-i 8* 
OL'^enu) (CO/JO f. 

^^ See ch. 8, pp. 226, 229. 


become Zeno's pupil and to earn renown of a kind by desert- 
ing the Stoics for the C^Tenaic doctrine of pleasure ; a man 
of some parts nevertheless, for he admired Aratos, and left 
among his writings two, of which the unusual titles rouse our 
curiosity, ' On the Kings of ancient days ' and ' On the morals 
of barbarous peoples '.'' Hither, too, came jolly souls like the 
'philosopher' Ktesibios, who brought officers from Antigonos' 
garrison at Chalkis to play tennis with him, and said that 
philosophy was a splendid thing, for it got him so man}^ 
invitations to dinner.-'*^ 

But the brightest member of the circle was the youthful 
Lvkophron of Chalkis. ''" He was probably already known 
as the author of the Alexandra, the most obscure piece of 
verse then in existence ; afterwards he was to arrange the 
comic poets in the library at Alexandria. But at present he 
was writing tragedies ; and Menedemos, it is said, found them 
to his taste. Lykophron himself had a frank admiration for 
the master, and wrote in his honour the satyr-play Menc- 
demoSy"" from which has survived the already quoted account 
of Menedemos' suppers. Good-natured banter there was in 
it in plenty ; and if the reference to cock-crow recalls the 
Banquet of Plato, it ma}^ be a harmless conceit to see in the 
choice of Seilenos as a vehicle for the praise of Menedemos 
a reference to Plato's famous comparison of Socrates to the 
carved figures of the old Satyr, whose grotesque shell hid 
the inner divinit}'. 

Into this society, in the intervals of campaigning, came the 
crown prince Antigonos.-"' His earliest teacher had been the 
Megarian philosopher, Euphantos of Ol ynthos, who wrote a 
treatise for him on the art of governing a kingdom.-*" 

^^ Diog. L. 7, 166, 167 = Arniin i, 422. 

*^ Athen. 4, 162 e ; Lpit. Athen. 1,15 c. Timon called him 'dinner-mad'. 

" Diog. L. 2, 140; Siisemihl i, 272. ^* See note 31. 

^^ Diog. L., Life of Menedemos, passim. 

*" Diog. L. 2, no. The passages where Euphantos is mentioned in papyri 
are collected by W. Cronert, Kolotes laid Menede»ios, p. 26. It may now be 
taken for certain that Euphantos i^as Euboulides' pupil and that it was 
Antigonos Gonatas whom he taught. (See generally Susemihl i, 621 ; E. 
Schwartz, Hermes, 35, 1900, p. 128; Xatorp, Euphantos in P. IV., 1907.) 
His supposed description of Kallikrates as a flatterer of Ptolemy III is a mere 
mistake, whether we ought to read Tj-pwroD for Tpirov in Athen. 6, 251 d, or 
not; and if Kallikrates the admiral be meant, the epigraphic evidence is 




Euphantos, however, was a pupil of Euboulides, and probably 
taught the regular Megarian doctrine, that there was only 
one good, unchangeable and unalterable, though known by 
different names, and only one virtue, the knowledge thereof. 

ntigonos may well have wondered what the knowledge of 
an unchangeable good could do toward the solution of the 
problems of the struggling universe as they presented them- 
selves to him. _Menedemos also taught that virtue was one ; 
but we may suppose that he did not thrust the doctrine of 
the unchangeable good upon Antigonos. What he did was 
to deal faithfully with his faults, as with those of a common 
man ; on one occasion he had to remind him, sharply enough, 
that he was a king's son,"*^ Antigonos had met a character of 
a type different to those at Demetrios' court ; and he recog- 
nized the fact. It is written that he loved Menedemos, and 
called him his teacher ; ^^ and the two remained close friends 
down to Menedemos' death. 

Menedemos was able to give the prince an example of that 
rare thing, a philosopher at home in the work-a-day world. 
He not only loved his country — many did that — but he also 
served her ; it is probable that to the Eretrians his political 
activity may have seemed more important than, his lectures. 
It has been well said that he represents an interval of truce in 
the bitter feud between, philosophy and practical life.**^ It 
might, perhaps, be equally true to put it that he was the fore- 
runner of the Stoics in the influence which they were so soon 
to exert upon those in high places ; it was not for nothing, 
nor was it chance, that Menedemos was to be the first to 
influence Antigonos. Whether his influence was exerted on 
the hnes which the Stoics afterwards laid down for the true 
practice of kingship we do not know.^^ Apart from this, it can 
be seen that Menedemos' society would be stimulating, and 
would make for indepe ndence of character an d judgement. 
But there was something deeper and wider to come, if it 

complete that his activity falls from some date between 280 and 270, to some 
date between 270 and 265, and not later ; see/. I/.S. 191 1, pp. 251, 254. 

'1 Diog. L. 2, 128. 

■*" lb. 2, 141 ; T]y(ina Se avTov Ka\ ' Avriyop' s Ka\ padrjTrjv aveK>)pvTTfv nmof. 

^^ Gomperz, /. c, p. 208. '*'' See chap. 8, p. 254 seq. 


could be found ; for this, Antigonos had to go to Athens, and 
seek knowledge at the fountain head. 

Athens was no longer head of a great confederacy, or 
mistress of the sea ; but the fact merely served to emphasize 
her intellectual pre-eminence. She was still, and for some 
time yet was to remain, the spiritual centre of the Greek 
world ; to Athens, sooner or later, came most of those who 
had any message for that world, and most of those who 
desired to be hearers. Antigonos in any case spent much 
of his time in Athens ; and of teachers he found plenty of 

There was Pl ato's school, the Academ ^^j^jjnder the 
headship of the universall}' respected P olemon. Its repute 
in Athens stood high, not merely tHrough the glamour 
of its founder's name, but from its well understood if un- 
ostentatious patriotism. Its leaders were Athenian of the 
Athenians ; in fair weather and foul they had stood quietly 
by their native cit}', and even if they had taken no active 
part against Philip their attitude was never in doubt; the 
time was to come when Athens would owe her safety to 
their intervention. But intellectually the school was mori- 
bund. Polemon and his friend Krates might be looked upon 
as rehcs of the Age of Gold ; but they were relics. Polemon 
led the hfe of a recluse, and his school had nothing new to 
say to the world, nothing to meet men's present needs. It 
had become merely orthodox ; it was on its way to become 
orthodoxy in deca}^ and, like other decaying matter, to breed 
strange forms of life alien to its own substance. Within the 
lifetime of those then living, Plato's school was to fall to 
preaching pure scepticism and suspension of judgement.'*^ 

Over against the Academy stood the ^Pe ripatetirs nf th e 
_Co lonnade, the successors of Aristotle^ under the headship 
"of Theophrastos . a man whose- man3'-sided learning can be 

*^ Respect for Polemon iind Krates ; Diog. L. 4, 19, 22 ; Acad. Ind. Here. 
(ed. Mekler), col. xiv, 1. 25. It was Arkesilaos who called them Xtix/'di-a toC 
Xpvaoxj -yivov^. — Patriotism of the School ; Wilamowitz, Antigo?ios, Excurs I, 
' Die Philosophen-Schulen und die Politik.' Xenokrates' embassy to Anti- 
patros after the Lamian war. Diog. L. 4,9, Plut. Phok. 27, Acad. Ind. Hoc. 
col. vii,ll. 22-41. Philip said he was the only man he had never been able to 
bribe, ib. — Krates saves Athens ; ch. 4, p. 9^. 


illustrated from the fact that he was at once a great botanist, 
a great jurist, and the first historian of philosophy. The 
mission of Aristotle's school in the world j^as^to joster the 
scientific spirit. It thirsted for facts. Collect facts enough 
abouTahything, and you were in the way of knowledge. So 
they diligently collected facts, from the constitutions of states 
to the characters of individuals, from the heights of mountains 
to the habits of molluscs, from the cedar which is in Lebanon 
to the hyssop which is upon the wall ; all was grist for the 
Peripatetic mill. 

In sharpest contrast to the Academy was the open and 
avowed sympathy of this school with Macedonia,'^'^ inevitable 
in the followers of one who had been born in Macedonia, 
who had been the teacher and friend of Alexander and 
Antipatros, and whose principal successors were all ahens. 
Their fortunes had fluctuated with the fluctuations of 
Athenian politics. Aristotle had had to leave Athens and 
seek refuge with Antipatros, at whose court he had died ; 
Athens had not been his birth-place, and she had not his 
grave. With Kassandros' domination came the palmy days 
of the school. Faithful to his father's friend, he had entrusted 
the governorship of Athens to a Pe ripatetic, Dem etrios of 
Phaleron ; for ten years the school was all powerful, and 
i neophrastos inspired the laws made by the philosophic 
governor."* ' Then came Demetrios the Besieger ; Demetrios 
of Phaleron fled to Kassandros and thence to Egypt; 
Theophrastos was banished by the triumphant democracy. 
It is true that he was soon recalled, and taught in Athens till 
his death ; but the school never really recovered its position 
there, though Theophrastos' successor, Straton, was a great 
physicist. The MaceHonia of its sympathies had been the 
Macedonia of Antipatros and Kassandros. It had no part or 
lot in the Macedonia of Demetrios, and its heart went to 
Alexandria with his namesake : Straton was the tutor of 
Ptolemy II, and corresponded with Arsinoe."*^ In Alexandria 
it still had a great work to do, in founding the Museum after 

*'^ Wilamovvitz, /. c. 

" Ferguson, K/w, 191 1, p. 265. 

« Diog. L. 5, 58, 60. 


its own model, and helping to turn it into the paths of natural 
science ; but in Athens the best of its work was over. 

The age, however, was one that called for a new message. 
Alexander had enlarged alike the bounds of the world and of 
human endeavour, and new thoughts and forms of activity 
were crowding in upon men. The clever Greek, his career 
hitherto bounded by the offices at the disposal of one small 
city, might now become chancellor of an empire ; all the 
great monarchies required ever}' able man they could get for 
finance and administration ; no one need limit his ambition. 
Alexander had put into circulation huge masses of hoarded 
gold, which could not fail, at least for a time, to raise the 
general standard of the world's well-being; every country 
was full of veterans returning to spend at home the spoils of 
Asia. Great new cities were springing up, affording endless 
emplo3'ment to architects, to sculptors, to overseers of slaves, 
to men in a hundred departments of human activit}-; trade 
was seeking out new routes for itself, grasping with a m3Tiad 
hands at the wealth of the East. Men's lives were becoming 
very full, and with this there must have come to each man 
the feeling, as it has come with every great expansion in 
civilization, of the increased importance of his own individual 
life. A man no longer felt himself a part of his own city| 
state, with his life bound up in the corporate life within those 
city walls ; he felt himself a separate individual ; his home 
might be what and where he chose to make it. There were, 
of course, thousands who had no such feelings, thousands 
who clung, actually or in idea, to the city state, regretting 
the past ; man}^, perhaps, to whom the present was actually 
repulsive, and who despaired of their world. But that the 
new philosophies arose out of despair is not easily to be 
believed. They arose to meet a want; and the want wasi 
a rule of conduct for the individual, who had in a greatll 
new world become conscious of the increased importance ofll 
his own individual life. 

The want was met. Plato and Aristotle had desired above 
all things to know ; and when they turned to politics and 
ethics, they had dealt — they could not otherwise — with the 
city state, and with man as a member thereof and in relation 



thereto. But man had now become a citizen of the world; 
Iphilosophy had to deal with him as such ; and the question he 
asked of his teachers was, how was he to act in relation to 
jhimself. Inevitably the philosophy of knowledge wa5-4o be 
replac ed by~ llie pliilosDpliyof'fflw7//r?: Ttle "Cynics, indeed, 
wereaiready teaching aTule ot conduct, of which the essence 
was, to have done with illusions and to get back to nature ; 
but they appealed largely to the poor, and most men were 
probably revolted by their roughness and their neglect of 
the ordinary decorums and courtesies of life, rather than 
attracted by the nobility and manliness inherent in their 

Fxo m this position _aifl ^ the ne w-SGheols. Already by the 
beginning of the century Ihe .Athenia n Epicuru s had gathered 
about him in his garden a number of friends ; soon his teaching 
drew half Athens. Men flocked out of all the other schools 
to the Garden, and they never returned.^^ The amiable and 
attractive character of the teacher, conjoined with the charm 
of what he taught, exactly met the needs of the numerous 
class to whom the new world was oppressive and peace 
desirable. How to escape from the delusions which made 
of that world a nightmare, from the fear of the gods and of 
death, from the spur of ambition and desire ; how to find 
happiness in oneself, in the calm of a virtuous and well- 
ordered mind that had cast off the worry and trouble of 
external things ; these ideas were greedily absorbed. And 
if some laid too much stress on one side only of their 
founder's teaching, and chose to treat physical pleasure 
as a means to the much-desired happiness, it is possible that 
the attraction of the school for the average man was not 
thereby materially diminished. 

But Antigonos' choice was not any of these. He turned 
as little to the Macedonian Colonnade as to the Athenian 
Academy or Garden. The first two had nothing to teach 
him ; he was not in search of abstract knowledge, or of large 
collections of facts, or of a rule of conduct befitting the 
members of a small city state. The Garden had less than 
nothing to teach him. What could there be in common 

^'' Diog. L. 4, 43. 


between the gentle frugal Athenian, who preached freedom \, 
from worry, and the rough-spoken hard-drinking Northerner, ^ 
to whom half the practical problems of a noisy and trouble- 
some universe were already crying for solution ? What it] 
was that led Antigonos elsewhere we do not know ; perhaps 
the advice of Menedemos ;^'' perhaps it was some touch of 
greatness in himself that turned him to the greatest man in| 
Athens, or the world. 

For the greatest man in Athens at this time was not 
Polemon or Theophrastos, or even Epicurus. He was a 
gaunt middle-aged Phoenician, weak of bod}', swarthy of 
skin, his face lined and shrunken, who carried his head on 
one side and loved to sit in the sunshine and eat green figs ; 
.c Zeno of Kition, -^^ thejounder of the philosophy called Sto ic. 
Of how andwhy Zeno came to Athens the accounts vary; 
it is certain that he was for a while a pupil of Krates the 
C3'nic, and alwa3's retained traces of the Cynic teaching, 
and that he was some time in the cit}' before he opened his 
own school, toward the end of the archonship of Klearchos, 
301/0.^^ His Semitic nature ^^ made him very strange in 
Athens. He was almost an ascetic in food and dress,'"^ as 
the standard of the time went. In the city of talkers he 
could keep silence and enjoin it upon others.-^-^ In the city 
whose idiom set the standard for the world he was careless 
how he spoke; current coin, he would say, purchased no- 
thing more for having a pretty picture on it ; to the end his 

*" Dionysios the Turncoat went from Menedemos to Zeno, Arnim 422 
= Diog. L. 7, 166 ; and Zeno had other pupils from Eretria, Arnim i9=Ael. 

^^ Life of Zeno in Diogenes : as to how much of it is Antigonos, see 
Wilamowitz, Antio^onos. Complete collection of biographical data in Arnim. 
A recent and full account of his life will be found in E. V. Arnold, Rcvium 
Stoicism, 191 1, pp. 64-77. There is some good criticism still in the notes 
to Zeller, Stoics, EpicureuJis, ajid Sceptics, p. 36 seq. (Eng. tr.). 

^^ The material passage of Apollodoros' chronicle, with Cronert's readings, 
is given in Beloch 5, 2, 39; Ferguson, Priests, 153 ; Arnim 36 a. On the 
interpretation see now Ferguson, Athens, p. 1S2, n. i. 

^ Contemporaries (e.g. Timon, Krates) regularly called him a Phoenician. 
His father, Mnaseas, must have belonged to the Phoenician colony in Kition, 
for the name is Manasses (see Wilamowitz, Staat umi Gesellschaft der 
Criechen (1910), p. 167). His mother might have been Greek. 

'" Diog. L. 7, 16, 26, 27. 

^ Arnim 284. Cf. Diog. L. 7, 23. 


.Gregk \^:as.Jull of solecisms.'"' In that great centre of intel- 

lectual activity he was too shy to lecture to a class; he 
walked in the Pictured Porch with two or three friends only, 
and if a crowd gathered to hear him he dispersed them by 
threatening to make a collection.''" In the home of fashion 
yhe gave offence b}- not repelling the poor and the dirty.^'* 
^His teaching must at first have seemed one gigantic paradox. 
To a world that wanted, and was prepared to welcome, some 
practical rule for making its life better and happier, he 
preached the strangest and most impossible idealism. He 
bade men live according to nature, while he bruised and 
lacerated poor human nature with every fresh precept. He 
flung in men's faces a rule of virtue so unworkable that 
he had to modify it himself in his own lifetime. He set up 
as the ideal an imaginary Wise Man so aloof that neither 
he nor his followers ever pretended to have any chance of 
attaining to it,"'^ and so seemingly ridiculous that every 
succeeding century riddled it with criticism, each new wit 
draped it with facile laughter. Small wonder that his fol- 
lowers were at first but few, 

[ethe was of those who ha\;; e__2rn;)vfd ika^ AyorlH^ The 
very severity oT his teachmg seems to have acted as a kind 
of tonic on noble natures ; and ideals are perhaps none the 
worse for being unattainable. To say that nothing mattered 
but virtue and vice was to the world foolishness ; but it was 
a noble folly that urged men to despise pain and misfortune, 
and to treat wealth and power, good report and evil report, 
as matters altogether indifferent. To call all sins equally 
sinful was a paradox ; '^^ but it at least emphasized the sinful- 
ness of sin. To preach the suppression of all emotions — if 
indeed he ever did preach it ^^— was absurd ; but at least it 

^^ Diog. L. 7, i8; cf, 7, 20. 

^^ Diog. L. 7, 14 (Wilamowitz' text in Antigonos^ p. 117). 

*« Diog. L. 7, 16. 

^' Tiie Wise Man described, Arnim 216-18. The simple and natural 
meaning of the phrase \ikyav \b^oZv\ avTov ei kcu fif] cro(})ov 6fjLo\\oyov]aiv yeyo- 
vivai (in col. 12, 1. 19 of the new fragment of Philodemos 7rep\ ruiv ^raiKav, 
Cronert, Kolotes unci Mefiedemos, p. 58), is surely this, that the later Stoics 
admitted that Zeno, though a great man, had never attained to being (TQ(f>6s, 
the Wise Man. 

*" on 'la-a to. anapTrj^iara. Amim 224 ; Zeller, /. C, 267. 

" The view has recently been strongly urged that the Stoics, from the 


involved the restraint of the unworthy ones. From the strif( 
and turbulence of the world the Stoic could withdraw int 
his own soul, and there, even if a slave or a beggar, he coul 
be free, he could be rich, he could be a king ; nevertheless, 
as a citizen of the world, he was rather to go out into the 
world and there play his part ; and as he was directed to find 
his happiness in virtue, and virtue in his own strength ofl 
mind and will, he would probably play his part well. Mor«f^ 
over, when things indifferent — that is to say, everything 
intermediate between absolute virtue and absolute vice — 
were at last admitted to belong to two classes, the Stoic 
became bounden to choose the preferable class ; and there- 
with came into the world t he first beginnin^ yg, r\'^ ^ philo- 
sophic concept, of the idea of duty.*^-^ The ideal Wise Man 
was a monster of seli-sutticiency, passionless, pitiless, perfect J| 
but in the attempt to reach perfection the Stoic was led to' 
examine the progress which he was making, and therewith 
came into th e world the j dpa n f cQnsrinn n mnrnl ^n-nrrth ** 
A philosophy which started from the jnoral con_s £iaiisacss.of 
the individual was led to take up and develop, though it did 
"norrre faially ^ ^riginate, the notion of conscience.*'^ The idea 
of conscience is still perhaps incomplete ; the idea of duty is 
still far from the categorical imperative ; but it was much to 
get a start made. And if the Stoic, happily, never realized 
his Wise Man, in the struggle toward him he realized much 
else ; and the men whom he formed were men.^^ Of all the 
S3^stems of the Greek world, Stoicism is the only one that injj 
any sense comes home to ourselves, or has any affinity to 


beginning, fiever taught the suppression of all emotions, but only of the 
irrational or vicious ones; R. D. Hicks, S/ot'c atid Epicurean, 1910, pp. 18, 
102 seq. 

'^ See the remarks of Sir A. Grant, in the essay on the Stoics appended to 
his Ethics of Aristotle, pp. 324-5 ; probably still the most illuminating 
account of Stoic ethics ever written. 

^'^ An idea very prominent in Seneca. 

-* (Tvi/eidrja-is, See Lightfoot, St. Paul and Seneca, (in his Epistle to ike 
Philippians), p. 301. The idea itself, which is not found in the Old Testa- 
ment, appears in Greek literature, as a-vveai^, first in Euripides {Or. 396), 
from whom, probably, Menander took it (Stob. Elor. 24, 3, p. 192, conscience 
makes cowards of the boldest) ; but the Stoics first brought it into philosophy. 

■'^ The Stoics were never tired of insisting on the virility of Zeno's teaching ; 
see Zenodotos' epigram ap. Diog. L. 7, 30, upafvayai) Xi'tyor tvpfs ; Seneca ad 
l{:lv. 12, 4 = Arnim 15, rigida ac virilis sapientia. 

U7i D 


the feelings of modern men and women. And it is not 
merely through its influence upon St. Paul that Stoicism 
affects the world to-da}'. The later Stoics travelled far from 
Zeno ; they learnt much that he did not know ; nevertheless, 
without his impulse they would not have been.'^'^ We may 
pass over Aristotle, and treat Plato as poetry ; but w^e cannot 
imagine a time when men, for their own sakes, will cease to 
read the slave Epictetus and his imperial pupil. 

Zeno in his own life attempted in many wa37s to practise 
[il what he preached, and rather more." He taught self-control, 
and his own passed into a proverb."^ He taught freedom 
'from false pride, and gave an object lesson of it by attending 
the lectures of a rival.*'^ In his theory all men were foolish 
and sinful ; in fact, he taught that one must try to find the 
good in people and not the bad."''^ He certainly never said 
that one should love one's enem^^ ; Ju it ho ^/r/ nnmrthin g 
y^r}^_Jikeit.'^ He uttered some extravagant paradoxes ; but 
v^^is life was held to be the pat-f^rn nf i-pmppranrp;/'^ This was 
the Zeno to whom Antigonos turned ; '^ and we would gladly 
•know more of their relationship. The friendship between 
lithe full-blooded prince and the shy philosopher must have 
I been a quaint one. It is known what Zeno thought of friend- 
*ship; a friend was a second self.'^^ Antigonos sought him 
out whenever he came to Athens, and loaded him with 
presents, with which the philosopher, true to his own teach- 
ing, refused to be either pleased or displeased, treating them 
as things altogether indifferent.'''' He would drag Zeno off 

^' See, inter alia, the valuable testimony of Apollodoros for his epoch, 
fr. 78 Jacoby. 

®^ Perfectly expressed in the Athenian decree for him, Diog. L. 7, 10; see 
ch. 10, p. 310. 

*" Poseidippos ap. Diog. L. 7, 28, Zijvavos iyKpari(TTejjov. 

^■' Polemon ; Diog. L. 7, 25. On Ti0oy, against which he preached (Diog. L. 
7, 22 = Arnim 317J, see ch. 8, n. 70. 

""^ Diog. L. 7, 19. ■'1 Arnim 297. 

" If not (To(^s he was aacppcoi'. See the Athenian decree for him, ap. 

Diog. L. 7, II, iT7aiV€<Tai jjLfv Zrjvcova . . . npfrrjs fveica Ka\ (TacPpoavfrji ; and the 

epigram of Antipatros of Sidon (Diog. L. 7, 29), 

Tav 8e ttot' aarpa 
aTparriTov povvas fvpe (rao(f)po(Tvvas. 

"* He was considered Zeno's pupil, Ael. V. H, 12, 25, 'Ai'Ttyoroy Z^vavoi. 
"^ Diog. L. 7,23 = Arnim 324 ; oWor f'yto, " lb. 7, 15. 


to some boisterous supper-part}^ not at all to the taste of that 
retiring ascetic, who would slip quietly away as soon as he 
could.'*^ Zeno_understood absolutely hojv^ L-to-keeyiiis iiiJe- 
pendence and dignity with his over-ma stering pupil. He 
-rebuked him severely lor drunkenness.'^ He refused at a 
later time to make any petitions to him on behalf of third 
persons, though he knew they would be granted as soon as 
asked. ^'^ To one who quoted at him the verse that he who 
associated with a tyrant became a slave, he replied that it 
depended entirely on your own state of mind.'^ With great 
skill he avoided politics, and escaped the risks of his school 
becoming stamped as pro-Macedonian, like the Colonnade;**" 
and the Athenians, though slow to learn his value, ended by 
honouring him no less than did Antigonos.**^ 

Yet it was not merely a case of the attr ^r\\nrt nf two oppn- 
sites. It is perhaps not quite right to call Antigonos definitely 
a Stoic, though his sympathy with sortie of the Stoic tenets, 
and the amount which he owed to Zeno, will appear when 
we come to consider his character as king of Macedonia : but 
it may be noted here that to some small extent his mind and 
Zeno's worked on parallel lines, and that some of the things 
which Zeno could tell him fitted in with what he had already 
learnt in the school of life. I f we seek the bond of unio n 
b etween these two opposi ff nntnrf^ " ' '■ '^' pM..huhiyriiiil^ 
thatjt^ consisted in a kind of ^avag^pjhonest y rommon to both, 
a Hpc^i ££^^'f2^~t>TP_|t| i i i^ j^riT'^^^^^^y^'^ ^'^ Tf is certain that 
Antigonos, whose admiration and respect for Zeno knew no 
bounds, refused to recognize between them any diff"erence 
of rank or race, or anything but the generous rivalry of a 
common aim.''-^ 

" lb. 7, 13 ; cf. Athen. 12, 603 d. 

" Ael. y. H. 9, 26 = Arnim 289. 

" Diog. L. 7, 14, with the note in Wilamowitz' A>Uii(o>ios, p. 117. The 
story, as told about Democharcs, has an improbable ring ; but see Ferguson, 
Athens, p. 172. 

" Plut. Mor. 33 D = Arnim 219. He altered Sophokles to uvk tan doiiXos, 
fjv f\fCd(pos ^i6X>|. 

*" Ael. V. H. 7, 14, TToXXa hi Kal Zrjvup inep 'Adrji>ai(cv (TToXiTiiauTO npos 'Ai/ti'- 
yovov, seems to me to be in contradiction with everything else we know. 

*' Ch. 10, p. 309. *^ For Antigonos, see ch. 8, p. 250. 

"-'■^ Diog. L. 7, 14, 15 ; Ael. V.H. 9, 26 = Arnim 289, Zi,v(oi(i . . . bC ulbois 
(iyuv Kn\ (Tnuvbrji Tjyti/ 'Avriyovoi ; and especially J/u/. Stoic. Here. col. ix 

D 2 


Somewhat such, howexer imperfectly sketched, were the 
teachers of the future king. 

= Arnini 24, Tr^oy) fxtv yap (Kt'ivov (Zeno), u>S tt/jos 1(Tov t« Ka\ OfjiOiov, avTOi 
(Antigonos) (piXovdKiav rjBeinv Koi Kf;^api(T/[i€i'»j«' vnoKuaOni, tov (5') avhpa davixa- 
^(iv Ka\ Tt(n(i)v Ka6' vn€p^o\T]v. "itrov and opoiov are to some extent Stoic 
catchwords (see Zeller, I.e., p. 267, n. i) : all good actions are equal, but all 
are not alike. Antigonos, however, treats his friend not only as an equal, but 
an equal without any dissimilarity of rank, race, (S:c. 



During the five years which elapsed from 294 to the 
peace of 289, Demetrios was emplo^'ed in extendjng the new 
Empire which he had won, and in attempting to consohdate 
his forces for a yet greater undertal<ing. It may be empha- 
sized at the commencement that his kingship of Macedonia 
was never much more than an accident, and that he never 
regarded the country in any other hght than that of a starting- 
place from which to recover his fathers Asiatic empire and 
perhaps aim afresh at the rule of the world. What he is 
seeking during these fiv^e confused years is so to order 
matters in the Balkan Peninsula that he shall acquire suf- 
ficient force for his undertaking, and shall be at liberty to 
use it. He does not indeed pursue his design with unbroken 
plan or unswerving tenacity ; such was not Demetrios' nature. 
But he does pursue it. The Greek possessions which required 
looking after are during this period under the government of 
Antigonos ; Macedonia seems largely to have looked after 
itself. Demetrios had no fear of interruption from Kassan- 
dros' heirs. Kassandros' surviving nephew, Antipatros, son 
of his dead brother Philip, and his dead son Alexander's 
widow, L3'sandra, had taken refuge at the court of Lysi- 
machos : according to one version, which may perhaps be 
believed, Kassandros' son Antipatros was still alive and there 
also. He had married Lysimachos' daughter Eurydike; and 
the king of Thrace now married Lysandra to his own son 
Agathokles. Lysimachos was a man of long views ; it might 
one day be of service to him that he had thus gathered into 
his own hands all the claims of the house of Kassandros. 

In the spring of 293 Demetrios turned southward to con- 
quer or receive the submission of Thessaly ; and on the Gulf 
of Pagasai he founded himself a new capital to bear his 


name. For one who desired to be a Greek as well as a Mace- 
donian king, Pella was too far to the north ; Kassandreia 
was better placed, but identified with the fallen dynast3\ To 
found a capital on conquered territor}' may seem strange; 
but in fact, as will be explained later, the kings of Macedonia 
regarded their title to Thessaly as perfectl}'' legal, as, in form, 
it was. The exact site of Demetrias is unfortunatel}' un- 
known. It may be accepted with confidence that it was not 
the town situated on the hill of Goritza, near Volo ; it is 
perhaps just as difficult to believe that it was only a new 
name for Pagasai, seeing that Pagasai retained its separate 
identit3^^ It may be that the actual city of Demetrias was 
rather in the nature of an enlargement of, and comprehended, 
Pagasai, somewhat as London comprehends Westminster ; 
but further excavation alone can solve its problem. Politi- 
call}', however, Demetrias was something greater than its 
actual stones. Demetrios, in founding it, seems to have con- 
sciousl}' imitated the arrangement which had originally made 
his beloved Athens into a great city. The town was an 
example on a large scale of a S3'noikismos, the combination 
of several communities into one ; and, beside Pagasai, the 
greater part of the little towns of Magnesia — eleven at least 
are known— became members of Demetrias,- perhaps bearing 
much the same relation to the capital as the Attic demes to 
Athens ; and Demetrios and his successors took over the 
conduct of the national Magnesian festival, the Hetairideia, 
traditionall}' founded byjason." Only a few small towns in 

* Demetrias has been generally identified with Goritza, about a mile from 
Volo ; the city there excavated is described, as Demetrias, by C. Friedrich, 
Ath. Mitt., 1905, p. 221. I think Beloch has shown that this was not 
Demetrias; Klio, 191 1, p. 442. He himself identifies Demetrias with 
(a possibly enlarged) Pagasai, on the strength of Pliny, N.H. 4, 8 (15) 
(oppidiim Pagasa, idem postea Demetrias dictum), and other evidence. The 
difficulty is, that Pagasai kept its identity and name as a kco/^;; of Demetrias 
(SyllP- 790). Demetrias therefore can hardly have been merely identical 
with Pagasai, enlarged or not. Only excavation can help. 

^ (ca)/i(j(. See Syll? 790 = /. G. ix, 2, 1 109 ; Strabo 9, c. 436. These two 
sources combined give twelve names, Pagasai, lolkos, Halos, Aiolos, 
Spalauthra, Korope, Nelia, Ormenios, Rhizous, Olizon, Boibe, Sepias. This 
synoikismos explains why Demetrias so dominated the later Magnesian 
league ; at the same time, without some independent towns there could have 
been no league. See Dittenberger's notes. 

^ Hegesandros ap. Athen. 13. 572 d. 



the north of. Magnesia seem to have retained their indepen- 
dence; and] the city territory included the whole of the long 
Magnesian promontory extending to Cape Sepias. It was as 
well for the Lord of Demetrias to have in his own hand the 
land connexions with the important Euboea.l 

It is not known whether Demetrias ever became a seat of 
art or learning, of wealth or commerce. But on one point 
tradition is clear. It was a very great fortress ; a virgin 
.fortrf'^'^, Jmpregnable to any direct assault. E rom their 
palace in this stronghold, like eagles from their eyrie, the 
JAntigonid kings could look south across the Gulf of Pagasai 
to the Euripos, where lay the second of the three fortresses— 
Demetrias, Chalkis, Corinth — which gave them their grip on 
Greece : while northward it dominated the mountains as far 
as the Pass of Tempe, which gave the Macedonian entrance 
into Thessaly."^! The eagle, poised in the air over their strong- 
hold, would see behind it Pelion rising fold upon fold, and 
over Pelion the pointed cone of Ossa, and on the north 
horizon, serrated against the sky, the snows of Olympos. It 
is the ladder of the Aloidai, lying as they dropped it; the 
ladder which the giants, in Homer's story, raised on end in 
order to scale heaven and master the gods. They raised it 
Olympos uppermost, with its foot on earth near Demetrias ; 
a fitting site for the capital of the last and greatest of those i 
who dreamt of climbing to the highest, and mastering the \ 
undivided heritage of Alexanderj P 

Passing on southward, Demetrios invaded Boeotia, and 
made a treaty on moderate terms with the Boeotians ; but 
with the summer the Spartan Kleonymos came north with 
an army, and Boeotia rose in revolt. The leader in the 
movement was Pisis of Thespiai, a man who had been pro- 
minent in the state since, in 313/2, he had helped Ptolemaios, 
the general of Antigonos I, to drive Kassandros' garrison 
out of Opous, an exploit celebrated by an ex-voto of the Boeo- 
tian confederacy at Delphi. Now, from an anti-Kassandrean 
and friend of the Antigonids, he had become an anti-Deme- 
triean, a change of view which was to be common enough 
in the Greek world since Demetrios had taken Kassandros' 

* Strabo, /. c. 


place. Demetrios met the revolt with his usual energy ; he 
brought up his siege train ; Kleonymos, unable to face him, 

[retired ; Thebes surrendered. Boeotia, as will be seen pre- 
sently, was so necessary a part of Demetrios' state system 
that he behaved with every clemency; and though a war 
indemnity was exacted, Pisis was not only pardoned but 
made polemarch of his native city. As governor of the 
countr}-- Demetrios left one of his best officers, Hieronymos 
of Kardia, the future historian.^ 

These events had occupied the year 293. Next spring 
Lysimachos started on his expedition against Dromichaetes, 
king of the Getae ; by summer, Demetrios had the news that 
the king of Thrace was a prisoner in the hands of the enemy. 
Demetrios at once set out for Thrace, hoping to seize the 
kingdom in L3^simachos' absence ; but on his way he received 
information both that Dromichaetes had released his prisoner 
and that Boeotia had again risen. He returned as quickly as 

\he had gone, to find that his son was already master of the 
Isituation. Antigonos had collected what troops he could, 
defeated the Boeotians in open field, and shut them up in 
uhebes. It appears that this his first battle was an extremely 
hard-won victory, if it be here that belongs the death of the 
Boeotian cavalry-leader Eugnotos of Akraiphia. The inscrip- 
tion on his statue recorded that the Boeotians were outnum- 
bered, that he himself charged eighteen times at the head of 
his squadron, and at the end flung himself on the enemy's 
spears, disdaining to survive defeat ; Antigonos restored the 
body of the patriot, unstripped and unspoiled, to lie in the 

\ tombs of his ancestors.^ 

^ Generally, Plut. Z>^;«. 39. Delphian ^a--^'(?/<? for Pisis ; Homolle, -5. C //. 
1900, p. 170. The people of Oropos set him up a statue in the Amphiaraion, 
dedication 'E0. 'Apx- 1886, p. 54, no. 15. 

^ Plut. Da/i. 39. Epigram on the statue of Eugnotos at Akraiphia, erected 
by his wife and daughter, representing him (it seems) charging on horseback ; 
P. Perdrizet in B. C. H. 1900, p. 70, who suggested that it belongs to this 
battle. It does not appear where else it could be placed. The 'enemies' of 
1. 12 are then Antigonos : 

ToSjL \i\iv ap d(r/C(jXeuroj', eXddfpov af/Lta x^o^ro, 
SaiKav eVi npoyovwv rjp'ia hvajxivUa. 
For the dates from 294 to 292 see generally Beloch 3, 2, 198 seq.; A.J. 
', Joiirn. hitern. 191 1, 221. 


Boeotia, however, had not risen without prospect of support ; 
she had made overtures to Demetrios' old protege, Pyrrhos 
king of Epeiros, and possibly, though this is quite uncertain, 
to Aetolia. While Demetrios was pressing on the siege of 
Thebes, Pyrrhos attempted to create a diversion by raiding 
Thessaly. He actually penetrated as far as Thermopylai ; 
but he had not yet got to the length of facing his former 
benefactor in the field, and he retired quickly when Demetrios, 
leaving Antigonos to continue the siege, appeared in pursuit. 
Demetrios did not follow him, and returning to Thebes threw 
new energy into the assault on the tov/n. He brought up the 
celebrated Helepolis or 'Taker of Cities', a huge ironclad 
tower of his own invention, running, or rather crawling, — (for 
it took a month, it is said, to travel a furlong),' — on eight 
wheels, and moved by 3,400 picked men to the sound of the 
trumpet ; it was divided into nine stages, each furnished with 
portholes for the discharge of different sorts of missiles, and 
these again protected by mechanically controlled ports made 
of leather bags stuffed with wool, impervious to stones thrown 
from catapults. Thebes held out strongl}' against the Taker 
of Cities, and Demetrios' attacks became so expensive that 
4— Antigonos felt compelled to remonstrate with him on the 
unnecessary waste of hfe. Demetrios flew into a rage, and 
far from sparing his men's lives began merely to expose his 
own, and ended by getting a bolt from a catapult through the 
neck. Nothing, however, would loosen his grip ; and some 
time in the summer of 291 the protracted siege ended in the 
fall of Thebes. Demetrios again showed clemency of a sort, 
hanging only thirteen and banishing a few others ; but Thebes 
was deprived of self-government and of course strongly 
garrisoned. Boeotia did not trouble Demetrios again.'' 

■^ Doubtless a great exaggeration. If it could be moved at all, it could be 
moved more than seven yards a day. 

** Plut. Dem. 39, 40; Pyrih. 7: Diod. 21. 14. The Helepolis is described 
Diod. 20, 91, doubtless from Hieronymos, who had seen it ; see also Plut. 
Dem. 21 and Athen. 10, 415 a, and Beloch 3, i, 233, n. I. On the attitude cl" 
Aetolia, Beloch,/. c. I think, from the wording of the ithyphallos (Uouris 
ap. Athen. 6, 253 d) that in 290 Demetrios had not yet been embroiled with 
Aetolia, consequently she did not help Boeotia.— Dates : It seems certain 
that the ithyphallos was sung on Demetrios' return from Kerkyra (Demo- 
chares ap. Athen. 6, 253 bj, that the Pythia celebrated by Demetrios at 


The trouble in Boeotia had not been without its effect on 
Athens. The traditional position of parties there ^ had been, 
that the democrats stood for an Athens free and independent, 
even if not Imperial ; while the oligarchs had been the friends 
of Macedonia, and their aim (they would have said) before all 
things was peace and good government. From 317 to 307 
Kassandros had ruled Athens through the oligarchs and 
Demetrios of Phaleron ; peace and good government had 
indeed been the lot of Athens, presented to her on the points 
of Macedonian lances, it In 307 Demetrios had freed the city, 
and been welcomed by the democrats with open arms as 
their helper against Kassandros ; the most violent of the oU- 
garchs of Kassandros' faction had been banished. But some of 
the democrats, — Stratokles, Dromokleides, and their friends, 
— had disgraced their cause and their cit}^ by the most noisome 
adulation of Demetrios, (though we ma}^ suspect that their 
misdeeds have lost nothing in transmission) ; the party began 
to break up ; there were changes in the government, and in 

1303 one of the most prominent men among the democrats, 
Demosthenes' nephew Demochares, who had kept his self- 
respect, was exiled. He seems, as was natural in an opponent 
of Demetrios, to have gone to Lysimachos' court.^^ 

Athens were those of 290 (Beloch 3, 2, 198), and that the ithyphallos belongs 
to the same year as the Pythia. Consequently Demetrios went to Kerkyra 
either autumn or spring 291/0, returning spring or summer 290. I cannot 
believe he went before Thebes fell, therefore Thebes fell summer or autumn 
291. I cannot follow Kolbe, Ath.Mitt. 30, pp. 73, 108, in putting Demetrios' 
visit to Kerkyra 289. Plut. PyrrJi. 10 does not show this ; and Demochares 
was a contemporary. See also Klotzsch, p. 184, n. I ; A. J. ^t\r\, Journ. 
Intern. 191 1, p. 221. 

^ On the parties at Athens in the early third century see Ferguson in 
Klio, 5 (1905), p. 155 seq., with E. Meyer's Nachwort, a most valuable paper. 
I do not know if the author would agree with me that after 293/2 the old 
labels lose their meaning, and we get in effect two new parties. 

"^ Demochares' banishment : Plut. /?£■/;/. 24 ; Laches' decree (Plut. Vit.X. 
Oraf. 851 d) ; Ferguson /. c, and Priests, 14 1-2. (He had been active in 
305/4 ; Syllp- 181, 1. 34.) The point is, how to reconcile Plutarch's statement, 
that he was banished by Stratokles, with that of Laches, e^eTreaev vn6 
ToiP KnToXva-uvTOii' Tov 8rjfiov. Ferguson {Klio, 5, 174) does it by supposing 
that Demochares held Stratokles responsible for the oligarchy of 301, it 
being a reaction against him. I think myself, with Kolbe, Ath. Mitt. 30, 
106, and many others, that Laches refers to the power behind Stratokles, 
Demetrios. When Laches wrote the words he looked back on two events, 
that Demetrios /^^^^Z ended by turning to the oligan lis and that Athens, under 
democratic government, had just fought a hard war with Gonatas; and he 
was praising an enemy of both kings. And if Demetrios was instrumental 


With the fall of Demetrios at Ipsos fell the democratic ' 
government in Athens. It was succeeded in 301/0, not by the 
oligarchs, — all the extreme oligarchs were in exile, — but by a 
government of moderates, men of different shades of opinion 
but who on the whole stood half-way between the Kassan- 
drean oligarchs on the one hand and the vehement partisans 
of Demetrios, — Stratokles and his friends,— on the other. 
They governed Athens from 301/0 to 296/5 ; their aim was to 
b^independent of all kings, and their ambition to lead a quiet 
iifeT^ it was a good aim ; but Lliey iiliared the common 
fallacy that it takes two to make a quarrel, and they believed 
that if they threw away the sword none other would bear the 
sword against them. The}' threw away the sword accordingly ; 
Athens renounced the compulsory military service which she 
had instituted after Chaironeia.^^ The reward came quickly 
enough, for in 296/5 Kassandros' friend Lachares, perhaps at 
the head of the more oligarchic section of the moderates, 
succeeded in a coup d'Etat and made himself tyrant,^-' to be 
expelled after a severe siege b}' Demetrios. 

Demetrios in forming his new government in 295/4 aimed 
at bringing about a union of parties. For a moment it seemed 
as if he might accomplish this. Naturally he looked primaril}' 
to the democrats, his friends of aforetime ; Stratokles again 
came to the fore, and a strong democrat and opponent of 
Kassandros' old friends, Olympiodoros, became epon3'mous 
archon for 294/3. But Demetrios sought also to win the 
moderate oligarchs, the men who had governed Athens since 
301 and had been overthrown b}^ Lachares. Phaidros of 
Sphettos he gained outright, as will be seen ; and in 294/3 
Stratokles moved a decree in honour of another moderate 

in banishing Demochares, we see why the latter refused to return to Athens 
under the amnesty of 293/2, or until Demetrios fell. — On Demochares 
generally, ch. 4, p. 6. That he went to Lysimachos is Ferguson's most 
probable conjecture, AiJictis, 137. 

" Plut. De))i. 30. Ferguson calls this government oligarchic ; Meyer, 
a moderate democracy. It seems to have been served by moderates of both 
shades, e.g. Phaidros of Sphettos, ex-oligarch, and Philippides of Kephale, 
moderate democrat. 

"* Ferguson, Priests, 1 62-6. 

" Lachares, the friend of Kassandros (Paus. i, 25, 7), must have been an 
oligarch ; Ferguson, Klio, 5, 160, inclines to this view. 


oligarch, Philippides of Paiania, who had been active under 
the late government.^* 

But two things overthrew Demetrios" plans. The first was 
that in 294 he himself became king of Macedonia and so stood 
in the place of Kassandros ; the other was that in 293/2 he 
carried his idea to its logical conclusion by issuing a general 
amnesty and recalling the friends of Kassandros, the old 
oligarchs who had gone into exile on the fall of Demetrios of 
Phaleron.^^ The consequences were immediately seen. Ail 
the better elements of the democratic party fell away from 
Demetrios, and indeed took up an attitude of hostility to the 
new king of Macedonia, who h ad recalled the K ass andreansj 
Demochares even refusedTo a\'ailhimself of the amnesty and 
remained in exile. This left Demetrios nothing but Stra- 
tokles and the rump of the part}-, and inevitably threw him 
into the arms of the moderate oligarchs, the men of 301, who 
were not necessaril}^ hostile to Macedonia on principle. This 
was the main line taken by the new division of parties ; but 
in fact there was some cross-division, for every man in Athens 
had to reconsider his political position. Henceforth the old 
labels of democrat and oligarch lose much of their meaning ; 
the dividing hne of parties was now tending to become 
l\ simpl}' this : were you for or ap ainc;t i-h p hoime o f Anti^ ypnos,? 
In answering this question men considered their individual 
desires as well as their former party names. The result was 
j the formation at Athens of two new parties : a ne w Nationalist 
j part}', of which the nucleus was composed of the sturdier 
I wmg of the old democrats, and who were to come into power 
I on Demetrios' fall ; and a party of the ' king's friends ', whom 
it will be easiest to rnll pro-Mnrfd^ninnSj and who un- 
doubtedly tended to absorb oligarchs of all shades. That 
each party, like every party, had a more advanced and a more 
moderate wing, goes without saying. But, taken as a whole, 
W^^the pro-Macedonians were the party that was to support 
Vv-'^ntigonos Gonatas throughout his long reign ; and fortu- 

'* /. G. ii, 302. This Philippides (not to be confounded with Philippides 
of Kephale) had in 299/8 moved a decree in honour of Poseidippos for 
helping the envoys sent to Kassandros ; /. G. ii, 297 = Syll} 188. 

^''' Dion. Hal. Deinanhos, 9. 


nately the career of one of them can be traced with exac- 

In 275/4, when Antigonos was firmly in the saddle, the 
pro-Macedonians put out what may be called the political 
confession of faith of their party in the guise of a decree in 
honour of one of their most prominent men, Phaidros_of 
Sphettos.^*' His father Thymochares had been a dev^oted 
adhereirTof Kassandros, to whom he had rendered many 
services on sea and land as commander of the Athenian con- 
tingents that aided Kassandros against the elder Antigonos ; 
and Phaidros also started life as an oligarch, a friend of 
Kassandros.^' He seems, however, to have managed in 307 
to avoid banishment, and he served as one of the generals 
under the moderate Government of 301/0-296/5 : and he 
continued to serve under Lachares when the latter made 
himself master of the city.^'* On Lachares' fall he again 
managed to avoid banishment ; he went over to Demetrios. 
He must have possessed considerable pliancy and consider- 
able popularity to have enabled him to steer so successfully 
between Scylla and Charybdis. However, to his credit, 
having once joined Demetrios, he never changed again. The 
king bridged over any awkwardness there might have been 
in utilizing Phaidros' services by permitting him to be sent 
as Athenian envoy to Egypt, to seek corn for the empty 
granaries of the city ; and by 292, after his return, his political 
development had completed itself, and the oligarch, the friend 

'* /. G. ii, 331 = 6y//.^ 213 ; Polyeuktos' year. It is necessary to emphasize 
the rather obvious fact that the words of a decree must be construed with 
some regard to the circumstances under which it was passed and the poHtical 
complexion of those who proposed it. That this decree was passed by 
a pro-Macedonian government is abundantly proved both by the single 
superintendent of the administration and by the wealth of excised references 
to Demetrios. 1. 38 Phaidros persuaded the people to contribute [what 
Demetrios wished] ; I. 43 he spoke and did what good he could on behalf of 
the people [and of King Demetrios, his queen and family, cf. Syllr 192, 
11. 10-12 ; /. G. ii, 5, 323 b] ; 1. 49 he obeyed the decrees of the boule and 
demos [and carried out Demetrios' policy, &c., v/ith an allusion probably to 
his fall]. For another set of suggestions, see Ferguson, Athens, 142, n. i. 
But 1 cannot take the references down so late as he does ; Phaidros could 
not hold office after Demetrios fell ; on Xenophon's year see App. 2, p. 422. 

'^ 1. 19 Ti?'' fiVTijV aif)f(Jiv e)(a)u Toii 7rp9y(I(-yn)j'oi$'. 

"* Follows from his being general f'nl ti^v nuixKTKfvijv twice in Nikias'year ; 
see Ferguson, Piiests, 139. 


of Kassandros, had finally become a moderate, the friend of 
Demetrios. He held office regularly during Demetrios' rule, 
and the party emphasized his loyalty to the king up to that 
monarch's fall.^^ We shall meet him once later. 

In 293/2 Demetrios, as already mentioned, issued a general 
amnesty, under which he recalled Kassandros' friends, the 
old oligarchs banished in 307. In what temper they returned 
may be guessed from many a similar event in Greek history. 
In 292 trouble was threatening at Athens, and the Boeotian 
revolt can hardly have been unconnected with the designs of 
the old oligarchs. Phaidros, however, who seems to have 
been the able man in the Government, kept his head ; he 
succeeded alike in preventing any coup d'Etat on the part of 
the returned exiles, and in keeping Athens clear of the war, 
a service to Demetrios as well as a service to the city ; and 
when he laid down his office at the end of the year it could 
be declared by his friends, without any overwhelming ab- 
surdity, that he left the city governed by its own laws under 
the form of democracy, and left it, as a friend of the king 
might construe the word, ' free.' ^^ 

^' He held a number of undated generalships, though some may fall 
301/0-296/5, Two of his generalships, under Kimon and Xenophon, are 
emphasized with dates and particulars, both for services to Demetrios. 

^^ For various interpretations of the Kntpoi Si'o-KoXot of Syll? 213 see 
Beloch iii, i, 233, n. i ; Ferguson, Pties/s, 150, Athens, 142. I go part of 
the way with Ferguson ; it seems to me that tlie priijiary reference is certainly 
to the return of the banished oligarchs. The phrase is perhaps more 
applicable to a o-rao-tir than to a war ; but the real point is the words K.a\ rrjv 
noXiv eXevdepai' Koi drmoKpaTovfievrju uvtovojxov TrapedccKCv Koi tovs vopovs Kvpiovs 
Tols p.fB'' favTov, which seem to have been rather overlooked. How could 
a member of Demetrios' oligarchic government tire. 292/1 keep the city 
'free and democratic ' ? The solution is, to look at it from a pro-Macedonian 
point of view (see n, 16), the point of view of such men as after the Lamian 
war had honoured Antipatros as a 'benefactor' of Athens (A. Wilhelm, 
Jahresh. 1 908, p. 90, no. 5). Phaidros, then, had to do with men who would 
have abrogated the existing laws, abolished the form of a democracy (it has 
nothing to do with the democratic party), and 'enslaved' the city. These 
are not external enemies, but men meditating an unconstitutional government, 
whether a close oligarchy or a tyranny. The pro-Macedonian authors of the 
decree, composing it under the suzerainty of Gonatas, could not for their 
own sakes admit that the city, though garrisoned by and governed for 
Demetrios, was anything but ' free ' and ' democratically governed ' ; ^forins 
of course remained. The returned oligarchs in 293/2 did not manage to set 
up an oligarchic government; Kolbe, Ath. Mitt. 30, 1905, p. 105, on Philo- 
choros fr. 146. The words Koivrjs acoTrjpiai imply that the returned oligarchs 
were hostile alike to Demetrios and to the freedom of Athens. At the same 
time, by 275/4 they were merging, wholly or in part, in the pro-Macedonian 


The fall of Thebes gave Demetrios peace for the moment 
and leisure to settle his score with Pyrrhos, who had made 
on him an unprovoked attack. An opportunit}', as it hap- 
pened, offered itself of repaying Pyrrhos for his raid while 
still avoiding an actual war with Epeiros. Pyrrhos, after the 
death of his Egyptian wife Antigone, had married Lanassa, 
the daughter of Agathokles of S3Tacuse, who brought him 
Kerkyra as her dower ; but Pyrrhos held the same polyga- 
mistic views as Demetrios, and for political reasons proceeded 
also to wed Birkenna, the daughter of the Illyrian king 
Bardylis. Lanassa's pride refused to endure the concurrence 
of the barbarian woman, though she were a king's daughter ; 
she ran away to her dower town Kerkyra, and from there, 
being ambitious and no more overburdened with morality 
than her husband, she issued an invitation to Demetrios to 
come and see her. Demetrios, notoriously easy-going on the 
subject of wives, came, saw, and married Lanassa ; she put 
Kerkyra into his hands. -^ 

party; (in 262/1 Antigonos made a son of Demetrios of Phaleron thesnio- 
thetes) ; hence their new friends refer but vaguely to their former short- 
comings. In the mouth of a nationahst, a-coT^pla and eXfvBepa would import 
a revolt from Demetrios (see App. 2, p. 420); nothing of the sort is of 
course in question here. I think Kimon's date must fall as soon as possible 
after the return of the exiles, i.e. 292/1 rather than 291/0; and as the 
reference to a money contribution for getting in the crops implies an external 
enemy a/so cf. /. G. ii, 334 = Sj//.'^ 232, U. 10, 11), the reference here must 
be to the Boeotian revolt. 

^^ Plut. /'yrr/i. 10 = Demochares ap. Athen. 6, 253 b. Pyrrhos certainly 
married Birkenna, as Plutarch says [Pyrrh. 9) ; and her son Helenos is 
treated as legitimate (ib.). Equally, Demetrios married Lanassa ; she sent 
for him b^ofxivrj ydpoiv iiaai\iKcov, and was not likely to hand over Kerkyra on 
any other terms. Beloch disputes this last (3, i, 214, n. i), taking the view, 
which 1 cannot think well founded, that the kings never had two wives at 
once (3, I, 380, n. 4). Was Phila then twice divorced and twice remarried ? 
There is not a hint of it in the tradition ; and she was most certainly 
Demetrios' wife in 307, when he married the Athenian Eurydike. All it 
comes to is, that he tried to prevent two queens meeting : Plut. Deffi. 14 is 
explicit enough. Pyrrhos married daughters of Bardylis, Audoleon, and 
Keraunos within ten years : were some kings content to give their daughters 
as concubines ? Did Lanassa's father Agathokles cultivate good relations 
with Demetrios on those terms ? Did Lanassa make her state entry into 
Athens as Demeter without being married ? Pyrrhos and Demetrios were as 
frank polygaraists as Philip II and Alexander; and the conventional stufi 
that came to do duty for the history of Pyrrhos is nowhere more amusingly 
illustrated than in Justin's reference to his vi'/a sancta (25, 5, 3). The 
question is examined at length by E. Breccia in Beloch's Studi di storia 
a/iHca, fasc. 4 (1903), p. 151 seq., who decides that the first generation of 
the successors were polygamists, but with no very regular system. 


It was probably in the spring of 290 that Demetrios went 
to Kerk3Ta, though it is possible that he passed the winter 
of 291 b there with Lanassa. For the moment his thoughts 
had turned to the west ; he occupied himself in cultivating 
good relations with his new father-in-law, Agathokles ; the 
tyrant sent his son to Demetrios, who sent him back in the 
compan}' of his trusted friend Oxythemis, son of Hippostratos, 
to ratify the treaty which had been negotiated. Demetrios also 
planned to cut a canal through the Isthmus of Corinth, a work 
which had to wait twenty-two centuries for its accomplishment; 
but the story that he sent an embassy to Rome to complain 
of some pirates of Antium, whom he had captured, is at least 
doubtful. He seems also to have acquired Leukas ; whether 
by conquest from Pyrrhos, or by gift from Lanassa, cannot 
be said." 

Pyrrhos took the loss of his wife philosophically enough, 
a matter on which he was presently to be taunted by the 
other kings ; but the questions at issue between himself and 
Demetrios w^r^^ the mitro me merely of an inordi nntf nmbi- 
tion on either side.-" and Lanassa was far less important than 
Kerkyra. BuFlHeToss of Kerkyra meant war ; and Pyrrhos 
strengthened himself for the inevitable conflict b}^ a definite 
alliance with the Aetohans. Aetoha, prompted alike by 
ambition and policy-, was ready enough to join him ; and 
Demetrios' absence at Kerkyra was her opportunity. 
Whether it was during the winter of 291/0 that Delphi came 
into Aetolian hands, or whether this most important event is 
to be placed earlier, is quite uncertain ; but at any rate the 
Aetolians, in the summer of 290, used their authority over 

" The treaty; Diod. 21, 15. — Oxythemis, ib. ; Athenian decree for him, 
/. G. ii, 243 = Syl/} ly^ ; see Athen. 6, 253 a and 14, 614 f.— The story 
given by Herakleides Lembos (Athen. 13, 578b) is a demonstrable tissue of 
absurdities ; there is no ground for the view of Niese (l, 370) and Beloch (3, 
I, 214, n. 2) that the Antigonos there refeiTed to is meant for Gonatas. — The 
canal : Plin. ^V. //. 4, 4 (5 ) : Strabo I, 54.— Rome : Strabo 5, 232. But Rome 
in 290 could not be said arparr/yea' t^s 'iraXia? ; and in 337 she had captured 
Antium, burnt its ships, and forbidden its people the sea. — Leukas : I read 
Demochares (ap. Athen. 6, 253 b, c) to mean that Leukas stood in the same 
relation to Demetrios as Kerkyra. Beloch 3, 2, 314 made it part of Lanassa's 
dower : Klotsch, p. 148, n. 2 and p. 185, makes it part of Akarnania through- 
out. It is impossible to say. — Dating, see n. 8. 

-^ Plutarch's life of Pyrrhos is a treatise on this vice oi TrXeove^la. 


Delphi to fortify the passes and exclude all adherents of 
Demetrios, including the Athenians, from the Pythian games 
of that year.-^ 

Demetrios returned to Athens in the summer of 290 ; he 
probably brought Lanassa with him. It appears that she 
desired to be initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries ; and the 
two made a state entr^' into Athens as the divine pair Demeter 
and Demetrios.-^ Demetrios found excitement running high 
over the insolent action of the Aetolians. Not merely were 
his friends excluded from Delphi ; it was reported that some 
of them, probably some Athenian citizens, who happened to 
be there, had been illtreated, and had only been saved by the 
intervention of Aischron son of Proxenos, a man whom Athens 
afterwards rewarded with citizenship. Popular songs were 
sung in the streets, invoking Demetrios as a god, and begging 
him to put down this new Sphinx which was despoiling 
Hellas, and to restore peace. Demetrios agreed that this was 
his business. But as Athenians could not go to Delphi, the 
king took the extraordinary course of celebrating an opposition 
Pythian festival at Athens ; he then returned to Macedonia 
to prepare for the inevitable campaign.'-- 

Pyrrhos had out-manoeuvred his teacher; he had com- 
mitted Demetrios to the difficult business of an attack on 

^* It has often been supposed that the decisive step which made Aetolia 
supreme over Delphi was taken about this time. See, however, Edmund 
Bauer, UniersiicJningen ziir Geogmphie tend Geschichte der nord%ijestliche7i 
Lafidschaf/en Griechetilands nach de?i delphischen Ifischriften, p. 30seq., who 
argues for the possibility of an earlier date, perhaps arc. 315. It may have 
been a gradual process ; for even after 279 their authority did not reach its 
maximum for many years, see ch. 7, p. 210. This seems also to be the view of 
A. J. Rt\r\, /ourn. Intern. 191 1, pp. 216, 224 ; the Aetolians did not occupy 
Delphi till 291, but had dominated it for some years previously. Klotzsch 
dates the occupation 293 (p. 179, n. i), as a set-off to Demetrios' occupation 
of Northern Phokis (which is now certain, see n. 29). 

^" A. J. Reinach, Joiirn. Intern. 191 1, pp. 221, 222. Certainly the name 
ArjfxrjTpa in the third line of the ithyphallos (see next note) is a conjecture to fill 
a gap ; but some goddess entered with Demetrios, and if Svoronos is right in 
seeing Lanassa as Demeter on certain pieces of Kerkyra (quoted by Reinach, 
/. c), the conjecture becomes almost certain. The Eleusinia were those 
of 290. 

2* Plut. Bem. 40 ; Demochares ap. Athen. 6, 253 b. The ithyphallos ; 
Douris ap. Athen. 6, 253 d. The real Sphinx harried Thebes; the new 
Sphinx, Aetolia, harried Thebes and all other friends of Demetrios ; therefore 
Thebes was already his (and not on Aetolia's side, as Beloch 3, 2, 200). — 
Aischron, I.G. ii, 309 ; grant of Athenian citizenship in Diokles' year 288/7 
for something he did at Delphi. 


Aetolia, with himself in reserve. This country of mountains 
and difficult forest paths, with few important towns and an 
elastic federal constitution, resembled one of those amorphous 
organisms which can be slashed in any direction and close 
again after the blow ; magnificently adapted for guerrilla 
warfare, Aetolia could not be subdued by a blow at the heart, 
for heart there was none. Demetrios stormed through the 
country, laying it waste ; and leaving his general Pantauchos 
with a large part of his force behind, he passed on to look 
for Pyrrhos, while P3Trhos started to look for Demetrios. 
They missed each other; Demetrios did some raiding in 
Epeiros, but P3Trhos' Aetolian allies brought him down on 
Pantauchos. The ensuing battle was a complete victory for 
the Epeirot, and established his already considerable reputa- 
tion as a general ; he himself struck down Pantauchos with 
his own hand.*^ Demetrios was forced to evacuate Epeiros 
and Aetoha and return to Macedonia. Here he fell ill ; and 
while he lay in Pella, Pyrrhos raided the country as far as 
Aigai, the old capital. This roused Demetrios from his sick 
bed ; P3Trhos fled before him, but was attacked on his retreat 
and lost part of his army. 

I To Demetrios the whole thing was an annoying episode, a 
hindrance to the development of his real ambition. He 
therefore came to an arrangement with Pyrrhos, on what 
terms is not known, except that it must have included the 
Aetolians and recognized their possession of Delphi ; Deme- 
trios kept Kerkyra. By the late autumn of 289 Demetrios 
was at last at peace with all men.^^ 

\ Demetrios had at this time, to outward seeming, the 
strongest power in the world, or at an^^ rate the world east of 
the Adriatic. He had taken scant pains, it is true, to secure 
his position in Macedonia itself; he seems to have taken 
Macedonia for granted ; but he had displayed considerable 
energy in carrying out his policy in Greece. His policy was 
fairly simple ; he desired to have a definite preponderance o f 

" Plut. Pyrrh. 7, De7n. 41. Pantauchos can hardly be the man of the 
same name who was one of the trierarchs of Alexander's fleet on the Indus 
y] years earlier (Arr. htd. 18, 6). 

2" Plut. Pyrrh. lo, Dein. 43. 


strength , not over this or that state, but over all the indepen- 
dent states of the Balkan peninsula taken together, neglecting 
of course the * barbarians' to the north of Epeiros and Mace- 
donia. Why he sought this is not quite so easy to see. He 
may have looked on it as a necessity in order to guarantee 
himself, — and he had numerous enemies, — against any con- 
ceivable combination ; he may have taken it simply for 
granted, a legacy of the days of Philip and Alexander. In 
any case, he sought it merel} ^ as a step to somethin g further , 
t o reconqu'est in Asia^ 'ihere was a touch 01 the Oriental 
about Demetrios ; and his ideas, if sometimes grand, were 
also sometimes grandiose. One thing, however, was quite 
clear ; the preponderance of strength which he sought could 
only be obtained by bringing over to his side a large part 
of Greece. To this end the efforts of five years had been 
directed : and on the whole with success. He seems n ever 
to have considered the question whet her he could tound"a v| 
stable,sJ^fe in Mac eiloiiia apail flOni the control of Greece- ] 
ITwas a question that had not occurred to any king of Mace- 
donia for two generations; and it was not a question inifU/^' 
which Demetrios, being such as he was, was likely to feel any' 

On the whole, his five years had brought him success. He 
controlled Thessaly and the smaller peoples who went with 
Thessaly ; Elateia and the northern part of Phokis ; probably 
the Eastern Lokrians ; certainly Boeotia and Attica with 
Athens. The possession of Megara and (more especially) of 
Corinth gave him the Isthmus, and these, together with the 
great island of Euboea, also his, guaranteed him complete 
control of the communications with the Peloponnese. In the 
Peloponnese itself he held Argos and the Argolid, Achaea, 
and most of Arkadia, the exceptions being Mantineia and such 
other towns as had always looked to Sparta. Of the indepen- 
dent powers three only were of real importance ; J^peiros 
and Aetoha in the north, Sparta in the south. Of the smaller 
independent states, ~ETis, andperhaps some of the little 
Amphiktyonic peoples, lay under Aetolia's shield; Messene 
perhaps alone was in a situation to enjoy a true neutrality.'-^ ' 

" Most of this is straightforward ; references in Beloch 3, 2, 302-3. Nor- 

E 2 


Omitting; Macedonia, all the states of the north of Greec e 
had one typical constitution, the koinon or L eague."" Its 
peculiarit}' was that, general!}' speaking, it AL:a^_notJ[buiided 
on city-organization. Omitting the Boeotian, which was a city- 
league and on a different footing, the Leagues in Northern 
Greece whose existence prior to this epoch can be proved are 
those of the Molossians, Aetolians, Thessalians, Phokians, 
Ainianes, and Akarnanians ; possibly also those of the Eastern 
Lokrians, the Phthiot Achaeans, and of this or tliat small 
people of the Amphikt3'onic circle.''^ These Leagues were 
dpfinifplyj^pfonal Each one, in all probabilit}', had started 
as the natural organization of one particular stem, one Etlmos 

them Phokis is now certain, as Antigonos still garrisoned Elateia circ. 285 ; 
B.Ph. W. 1912, 507, inscription from Delphi for Xanthippos son of Ampha- 
retos, on a second monument near the bronze lion (ib. 477), with Pomtow's 
commentary. Eastern Lokris rests on a combination, Beloch 3, 2, 358-9 ; 
but now that Northern Phokis is certain, it is perhaps to be accepted on 
geographical grounds. For Euboea there is a very important inscription 
recently published by K. Kourouniotes, 'E(f-. 'Ap;^. 1911, p. I, no. i ; hne 21 
refers to the use of Demetrios' money in the island, line 36 refers to a festival 
for his worship, named Demetrieia, which was to be celebrated alternately 
at Histiaia, Chalkis, Eretria, and Karystos. A group of proxeny decrees for 
Macedonians (ib. p. 25, nos. 7, 10-12) also seem to belong to Demetrios' rule, 
but perhaps date from before Ipsos. 

^° H. Francotte, La PoHs grecque (Siudiefi zi/r GescJiichte unci Kititiir 
des Alteituvis, vol. i, 1907), uses 'confederation' for the permanent union, 
Bundesstaat, and keeps ' ligue ' for the union for a temporary object, Staaten- 
bund. It would simplify matters if one could do likewise in English, and it is 
obviously absurd to use the same term for the Achaean League and the 
League of Corinth ; but the word ' League ' for the confederacies of Aetolia 
and Achaea is so engrained in English that I do not see how to alter it. 

^^ On these Leagues generally, see Francotte, /. c. ; G. Fougeres, koivov in 
Dar.-Sagl. — The Thessaliivi League existed in 422 (Thuc. 4, 78), and was 
reorganized by Pelopidas on the Boeotian model, with an archon and four 
polemarchs, one for each of the four districts of Thessaliotis, Pelasgiotis, 
Phthiotis, and Hestiaiotis ; cf. Syll? 108. — T\\& Phokian League is attested 
by an old federal coinage going back perhaps to the sixth century; Head^ 
338. It was reconstituted in 239 by Athens and Thebes ; in the third century 
its eponyms were the ^aKafix^'- — The League of the Ainianes is pi^oved for 
before 279 by G. D. I. 1430 = /. G. ix, 2, 4. G.D. I. 1429^= /. G. ix, 2, 3 
may also refer to the League, perhaps just after Kassandros' death (see 
Wilamowitz' note in /. C, I.e.). It had a federal coinage chx. 400-344; 
Head^ 291. — The A/carnanian League is proved for 391 by Xen. HelL 4, 6, 
4, 7. — The League of the Opoiinfia/i or Epikne/nidian Lokrians depends on 
/. G. ix, I, 267, which may be older than the third century; /. G. ix, i, 334 
does not use the term koivov. — The supposed federal coinage of the Phthiot 
Achaeans is now attributed to the Achaean League; Head^ 416. Their 
League, therefore, may not antedate the third century ; it is proved for the 
third century itself by /. G. ix, 2, 205 11, p. xi, see ]\I. Laurent's commentary 
in B. C. H. 25, 1901, p. 343. 


orFolk_L.even in the second century, in the case of a League 
so important as the Thessalian, Fol k and League could_ 
J2P_n?pd '^jmnnyi-noiislv." ^ Ij Lthis natural organization of the 
Folk the original u nit was the territor}' of so me particular 
sept, with its villages : the town members, which must have 
come later, are more or less of an accident. This can be 
proved for the Leagues of the Molossians and the Aetolians ; ^^ 
and it must be true of all. It takes some mental effort to 
realize that over a large part of what passed as Hellas there 
were really few cities of much importance, (unless like 
Ambrakia or Naupaktos the}'' had been founded by intruders 
from the south), and that the t \j)ical or f y^nJi^^*"'^'"' ^^'^^'^ '^ . t'n f i- - 
had nothin»^to do with cities at all. 

But many of these Leagues had not been able to main- 
tain their independence. With Thessaly, Northern Phokis, 
and perhaps Eastern Lokris in the hands of Demetrios, 
Akarnania subject to P3Trhos, Western Lokris and Delphi 
controlled b}^ Aetolia, the Greek-speaking world north of 
Boeotia was really at this time divided between three powers ; 
and the reality of the division, with whatever changes of 
boundar}'', was to be emphasized increasingl}^ for many years 
with the growth of the Aetolian League. 

Macedonia was still much the greatest of these three 
. .powers. But it was not the Macedonia of forty years before. 
The population had suffered heavily, both from constant war 
and from settlement abroad ; Paionia was independent again 
under its king Audoleon, while the border provinces of 
Parauaia and T3'mphaia had been ceded to P3Trhos. A con- 
sideration of the social and political condition of the country 
may be deferred until Antigonos' accession ; •'* but two things 

^^ A decree of Larisa of the second century, /. 6". ix, 2, 508, uses to koivov 
Oeaa-aXojf and edfos to Q(a-a(i\o)v indifferently. Therefore, when the Delphic 
inscriptions refer to small peoples, such as the Malians, Dolopes, and Oitaians, 
as idvr], it is not necessary to suppose that they were still in the very primitive 
stage when the KOiuuv had not yet replaced the edi'ns\ 

'' The cantonal character of the Aetolian League was emphasized by Free- 
man. Its territory was divided into districts called reXq ; Francotte, /.c, 
p. 160. E. Bauer (pp.c, p. I2seq.) has shown that most of the Aetolian 
ethnics refer to tribes that have no city centre, and that the same applies in 
part to West Lokris. — For the Molossian League, G.D.I. 1347 '^loKouixoi 
"OfKfjaXfs Xi^a)[Xti)i], the clan and village names. 

^^ For Macedonia see ch. 7. 


may be noted here which among others ten ded to _distinguish 
Macedonia very sharply irom its neighbours. Allt he League_s 

- " of Northern TTreecp. li ke mOMt Other federa tions, were lounded 
-Qund about a religious centre, often one of great antiqui ty.-'" 
[acedonia ha d n p rp''g"^'is-£^4:>4re . There was never any- 

'^thingin iviacccionia which meant for the country what Dodona 
meant for Epeiros, what Thermos had meant and Delphi was 
to mean for Aetolia, what the worship of Athene Itonia was 
to Thessaly, or that of the Aktian Apollo to Akarnania ; and 
Macedonia got on perfectl}^ well without it. This was one of 
t he things which made Macedonia seem alien to Greek eyes ; 
anotherwas its l yinnarrhiral rorm titutiom Thls wcut much 
deeper than the mere fact that Macedonia was alwaj^s, and 
always had been, a monarch3\ Eor the people themselves 
were devoted adherents of the monarchical principle ; if they 
got a kmg the}' disliked they certamly ejected nmi^'butmerely 
took another. Even Epeiros, before the end of the century, 
was to kill oflf the surviving members of Pyrrhos' hne and 
become a republic ; but republican principles never took any^ 
real hold of the MacecTonian.'"' He remained devoted to his 

^^ The religious centre is not necessarily always known, especially for the 
smaller kolvu. — For the Akarnanian League, that the temple of Apollo at Aktion 
was the religious centre is proved for the early third century by the treaty be- 
tween Aetolia and Akarnania published by Soteriades ('E(/). 'Apx- 1905, p. 55), 
and for the second century by the lepniroXos of Apollo giving his name to the 
year {Sy//.- 482 = G. D. I. 1379 ; G. D. I. 1380 a and c ; /. G. ix, i, 513, 515, 
517). — For the Thessalian League. In 274 Pyrrhos, who considered himself 
at the time ruler of Thessaly, divided the spoils taken from Antigonos and 
dedicated the Macedonian shields at Dodona, the Gallic to Athene Itonia ; 
Plut. Pyrrh. 26; Pans. I, 13, 2-3. So Perseus sets up a decree in three 
temples, Delos, Delphi, and that of Athene Itonia ; Polyb. 25, 3, 2. Theoroi 
from Kos circ. 250 go to the festival Itonia ; R. E. G. 1910, p. 319 (this decree 
will be 87 in the Kos section of the Corpus). On these facts I would adopt 
the brilliant suggestion of Fougeres (/. c.) that the hieromnemones of Syll? 
108 were the federal hieromnemones of the cult of Athene Itonia. The site 
of the temple is unknown (see this discussed by Wace, Droop, & Thompson, 
B.S.A., No. 14, p. 199) ; the festival was celebrated in the fourth century 
(? if always) at Krannon (Polyaen. ii, 34). 

^^ In saying this I do not overlook the koivuv M[n'<-6?d'a)r] of Syl/." 262 : the 
restoration, it seems, must now be definitely accepted, for P. Roussel writes 
(B. C. H. 191 1, p. 441, n. 3) 'on a trouvd en 1904 un fragment de cette base, 
lequel garantit la restitution M[aKeSnra)i'] ', and suggests that the fragment 
B. C. H. 28, p. 112, no. 5 may refer to the same koivov. As to date, it must be 
connected, I think, with the change in the royal style from the BacrtAeiiy 'A. 
MaKfSwi/ of Gonatas to the Bao-tXeiV A. or $. km M«KeSdi'fr of Doson and 
Philip V (/. //. S. 1905, p. 269, and see ch. 13, n. 61) ; we do not know the 


monarchy till the Roman forced ' liberty ' upon him at the 
sword's point. 

j^peiros is perhaps the first known instance of a state 
a doptmg a combitiatioii of the federal and monarchical prm - 
ciples._ The country had only recently begun the astonishing 
development which, for a generation, was to raise it to im- 
portance for the present at the expense of its whole future. 
Its unification was comparatively recent. The population 
was a mixed one of many layers ; so far as can be traced, 
Greek septs had entered the land at a very early period, over- 
laying the peoples they found there, people who worshipped 
at Dodona a god of running waters and provided him with 
priests of curious customs ; but the Greek invaders had been 
in turn driven out or overlaid by the pressure of the Illyrian 
advance from the north. The Illyrian tribes had divided, 
some swamping a large part of northern Greece, others cross- 
ing the Adriatic and forming settlements in the south-east of 
Italy. To what extent Greeks again entered Epeiros after 
the Illyrian settlements is doubtful. It is doubtful if Greek 
nationality can even be conceded to Pyrrhos and the royal 
house ; and a great number of the Epeirot personal names 
are not Greek. That the people were largely Illyrian by 
blood, and had derived their Hellenic civilization from the 
Corinthian colonies on the coast, seems to be a conclusion 
that is likely to become definitely established."' 

The leading tribe, the Molossians, appears under Alex- 
ander I (342-326) in the form of a League, which dates by the 

style of Demetrios II, but the obvious inference is that the koiviw was an out- 
come of the difficulties that marked the beginninpf of the reign of Doson. But 
the point I wish to make is, that the reigns of Uoson and Philip (on which 
our information is fairly full) show that the K<uvnv apparently never had any 
influence or effect, or ever circumscribed the royal power. 

" On the ethnology, see Paul Kretschmer, Einleiiuns; in die Gescli. d. 
griech. Sprache, p. 254 seq. ; A. Kick, Vorgriechische Ortsnaincn (1905), 
pp. 84, 85, and Hattiden uttd Dan u bier in Griechenland (1909), p. 31 ; J. 
Kaerst, Epeiros, in P. IV. ; M. Kiessling in Zeitschrift fiir Ethnologic (1905), 
p. 1015 ; Martin P. Nilsson, Studien ziir GeschicJite des alten Epeiros (1909) 
and a review of this work by H. Swoboda, W. Kl. Ph. 1910, p. 937 ; Klotzsch, 
p. 2, n. I, and literature there cited. According to Nilsson the place-names 
are mostly Greek (he gives a list (p. 12) of those that are not Greek, and Fick 
has some that are certainly not) ; but very many of the personal names are 
not Greek. For the royal house, see Nilsson, p. 8. 


king and by one of its own officials,^^ the League being con- 
stituted, as lias already been mentioned, b}^ clans and villages,^-* 
It is probable, however, that the Molossian League antedates 
the fourth century, and it is possible that others of the large 
Epeirot tribes were similarly organized ; ^^ but it is certain 
that the Molossian League presently expanded beyond its 
own limits, for an unknown League is found inquiring 
of the god of Dodona if it shall join the Molossians.^^ The 
pr ocess by which t\\p A/Inlocgicn T paoriip bf came the ' Epeirot 
alliance ' is obscure.'*- It ma}' be that we have here a 
successful attempt at self-assertion on the part of the Thes- 
protians and Chaonians /" but however it came about, it is 
certain that by the end of the fourth centur}' we find that the 
official designation of the tribes of Epeiros is ' the allies of the 
Epeirots ' ; nevertheless the}' continue to date by the Molos- 
sian official called ' prostates ', and the king.'*^ It seems 
probable that the Molossian League retained its separate 
existence, while forming part of the larger confederation ; *^ 
and the most helpful way of regarding it is undoubtedly the 
analogy put forward by a German writer, that the Molossians 
and their king in Epeiros had somewhat the position of 
Prussia and her king in the German Empire. ^"^ The state so 

^^ G.D.I. 1334. The League is to koivov rav MoXoaa-oov, and the ofificial 
wpocTTdTi]s MoXoaacbf, on whom see Nilsson, p. 61 seq., Klotzsch, p. 29 seq. 

^' G.D.I. 1347. On the sub-stems generally, Xilsson, p. 14. 

^^ G.D.I. 1370. \to koivov t\wv effr7rpa)r[(Iij'] is probably a correct restora- 
tion, but a little dangerous to argue from. 

*'^ G. D. I. 1590 = Michel 844. 

^' See Nilsson, p. 61. — The intermediate stage of the avfifiaxoi tcov MoXoo-- 
ao)v, given by Francotte, /. c, depends upon A. Fick's restorations of G. D.I. 
1337 and 1343. Klotzsch, pp. 31 and 53, has utilized the restoration of 1337; 
but in fact both the stones are too broken for restorations to be anything 
but guess-work, and they must be abandoned. (On the right reading of what 
of 1337 is on the stone see Nilsson, p. 59, n. 2.) 

^^ Nilsson, p. 64. 

** G.D.I. 1336 = Michel 317. More tribes are known than the 14 or 1 1 
of Theopompos ap. Strab. 7. 323 ; Nilsson, p. 47. 

*' According to Nilsson, p. 64, the ' Molossian League ' did not co-exist 
with the ' Epeirot Alliance ' ; and it may be noted that the coins with MoXoa-- 
cTMi' are now placed before 342, those with AIlEIPflTAN at some time prior to 
238 (Head* 321, 324). But, in fact, the evidence for Nilsson's view seems 
entirely negative ; the prostates of the Molossians remained ; and it is more 
probable that the Molossians continued to be organized federally, within the 
kingdom, see Klotzsch, p. 29, n. i. 

^^ Klotzsch, p. 53. 


evolved contained both elements^ the republican and the 
monarchical; and it is believed that the official called the 
prostates of the Molossians, who presided in the popular 
assembly, played the same part as the ephors at Sparta in 
representing and perhaps upholding the rights of the people 
against the principle of monarchy embodied in the king.^' 
This belief, and the frequent division of power between 
two kings, may tempt us to compare the Epeirot state 
with the Spartan, not without reference to the Illyrian origin 
of the two peoples ; but such a comparison is probably mis- 
leading. There is no real evidence for the part that has been 
assigned to the prostates of the Molossians ; it is far from 
certain that the actual division of power in Epeiros between 
two kings had ever a legal basis ; *^ and time was to show that 
the strongest element in the Epeirot state was the federal 
principle. The state formula under Pyrrhos was ' Pyrrhos 
the king and the Epeirots ' ; ^^ and the money that bears the 
legend ' of the Epeirots ' probably belongs to the time of the 
kings and not to the Epeirot League that was formed on the 
extinction of P3Trhos' house. ^° Though the king led in war, 
his power had certain very definite limits. Apart from the 
continued existence of the prostates of the Molossians, the 
people never abandoned their ancient right of removing a 
king whom they disliked ; ^^ and once a year, in the assem- 
bly of the people at the holy place at Passaron, the king 
covenanted with them that he would rule them according 
to the laws, and they with the king that they according to 
the laws would maintain his kingship.^^ The history of 
Epeiros is of great interest as an illustration of the difficulties 
inherent in its combined constitution ; and if the struggle 
between the principles of monarch}'' and republicanism 
appeared to be settled in favour of the former by the activity 
of Pyrrhos, it was in fact definitely decided in favour of 
republicanism two generations later. 

A kingship of this kind, however, in a military age must 

" lb. p. 30; Guy Dickins,/. //. 6'. 1912, pp. i, 14. 

■"* Nilsson, p. 71, regards it as a legal double kingship; co7itra Klotzsch, 
p. 59, n. 1. 

^° Syllp' 203. *" See n. 45. "^^ Nilsson, p. 70. 

"^ Plut. Pyrrh. 5. On Passaron see Klotzsch, p. 32. 


depend much on the personaHt}^ of the king; and in the 
hands of the energetic Pyrrhos it no doubt came to differ 
httle, for a time, from aji ah^ohitp mnnarrhy. It was about 
295 that Pyrrhos had attained to sole power by the unification 
of all Epeiros in his hand alone ; and the difference was soon 
felt. The countr}^ had no great tradition, and had for a time 
been little but the humble vassal of Macedonia ; bu t Pyrrhos 
possessed both inexhaustible ambition and military talent, 
and seems to have been well backed up by his people, who 
did not forget that the great Alexander had had an Epeirot 
mother, and that their king was the Conqueror's cousin. 
Pyrrhos accordingly soon developed his kingdom both in 
extent and militar^^ resources. As the price of aid rendered 
to Kassandros' son Alexander, he had obtained the two 
western provinces of Macedonia, Tymphaia and Parauaia, 
together with the cession of the then subject-peoples of 
Akarnania, Ambrakia and Amphilochia.^^ At the same time 
he must have acquired Atintania, which from its situation 
could hardly have maintained its independence any longer ; 
he thus bordered to the north directly upon Illyria, and some- 
what later was able to extend his kingdom much further 
northward at Illyrian expense, and bring under his sway the 
considerable Greek city of ApoUonia,^'* though D3Trachion 
remained in the hands of the Illyrian king Monunius, who 
had his mint there and was on friendly terms with the 
Aetolians.^^ Pyrrhos' marriage with Lanassa had already 
given him Kerkyra ; ^^ and though he lost the island to 
Demetrios for a time, it was afterwards recovered. Roughly 

^^ Plut. Pyrrh. 6. It is tempting to suppose that Atintania is meant instead 
of Akarnania ; but one cannot alter the text. Of course, as Nilsson points 
out (p. 57, n. i), every one does tacitly alter Plutarch's text by adopting the 
readings Tvpi<p(nnv and napavnLni> ; but there seems to me to be all the differ- 
ence in the world between altering a known name and altering a meaningless 
collocation of letters. — On Atintania and Akarnania see further Klotzsch, 
pp. 1 7 1-4, who tries (I think unsuccessfully) to explain the Akarnanian 
'mercenaries' of Pyrrhos' expedition to Italy by supposing that Pyrrhos 
merely became head of the Akarnanian League in the same way as he was 
head of the Epeirot alliance. But, even so, he could have called out the 
Akarnanian troops. See ch. 5, n. 20. 

^* Beloch 3, 2, 318. 

^^ His coins, B. M. Cat., Thessaly-AetoUa, p. 80 ; Head ^ 316. They show 
the jawbone of the Kalydonian boar, hence some connexion with Aetolia. 

^^ Beloch 3, 2, 313. 



speaking, ther efore, his kingdom lay riHit alonp- ^^IA AHHaHr^ 
stretching from the gulf of Corinth well into the barbarism of 
" tne north ; h is eastern frontier in its northern part adjoine d 
Macedonia, w ^ile in its southern it lay along the AcEeloos 
coterminous with Aetolia ; he had completely cut Macedonia. 
off fro m access to the western sea. With his back to Greece 
and his face to Italy, his sphere ot action naturally appeared 
to include that Greater Greece which lay west of the 

Th e acquired Greek character of his kin gd^"i ^v^'^ '^^■'pII 
reflected i" J'"'^ '^piritiinl rnpitnli Far in the north of the Mo- 
lossian territor}', in a pleasant valle}' under Mount Tomaros, 
there lay among its fountains and huge oak-trees the famous 
sanctuary of Dodona. Its ancient spring-god, who had 
spoken to his votaries by his bubbling spring or ever the 
Greek came into the land, had long since acquired a respect- 
able identification with the god of the conquerors as Zeus 
Naios ; and the successors of his primitive priests, whose sanc- 
tity had been bound up with a very un-Hellenic abstinence 
from ablutions, now wrote the answers of the god upon their 
quaint lead tablets in good Greek surroundings. Pyrrhos 
may himself have built some part of the theatre and porticoes 
of modernized Dodona, and may have either founded or 
enlarged the festival, Naia, held in the god's honour. He 
cannot have been insensible to the strength that it conferred 
on Epeiros, in Greek eyes, to contain the second in fame of 
Panhellenic oracles; and he himself dedicated the spoils 
taken from the Macedonian and the Roman in the temple of 
the Dodonaean Zeus."^' 

" On the Zeus of Dodona, see a series of articles by A. B. Cook, ' Zeus, 
Jupiter, and the Oak,' in Class. Rev. 1903 and 1904, especially 1903, p I74- 
I note two points : (l) his Water-Zeus is either a god of rain, 'V€Vior,''0/x3p(os-, 
or of the sea, Qakaa-a-Los, 'E^'(iXto9 ; no di7-ect evidence is adduced that Zeus 
was ever a god of running-water or springs ; (2) on the original function of 
Zeus as a sky-god, the author says (1903, p. 179), ' It must be admitted that 
the conception of Zeus as a sky-god. if present at all, was very much in the 
background at Dodona.' — If, then, Zeus of Dodona had much of the spring- 
god and little of the sky-god, the natural inference is that he replaced an 
older spring-god ; and Dodona thereon falls into line with various other 
prae-Hellenic water-worships in Thrace and Macedonia, that of the /^eSv for 
instance, ch. 7, n. 26. The customs of the Heiloi or Selloi seem too to be best 
explained as survivals of the customs of a (non-Hellenic) primitive priesthood ; 


As Dodona was the spiritual, so Pyrrhos made A mhrakia 
thTpoTTTical capital ot his country, and adorned it with wor ks 
of art.^'^ The Gulf of Ambrakia became the centre of gravity 
of his power; he had already founded, on the isthmus where 
Nikopolis afterwards stood, the town of Berenikis, named 
after Antigone's mother, a name which sufficiently indicates 
the philo-F.crypfia n pohcy of Epeir os at this period.-^^ 

The forces of which Fyrrhos could dispose cah only be 
arrived at by an approximate reckoning. It will suffice to 
say here that Greater Epeiros, as it existed in his time, 
reckoning in Ambrakia, Akarnania, and the two Macedonian 
provinces, could probably raise a field force of from 18,000 to 
20,000 men, omitting mercenaries.''''' 

Aetolia at this time was a land altogether undeveloped, 
but beco ming conscious of a national life and considerable 

(see on this, and for other cases of such survivals, Leaf on //. 16, 233, and of. 
Nilsson, op.c, p. 35, n. 2). I am supposing that Naios means 'god of the 
spring ', as generally thought, and that the cult of Zeus Naios at Athens and 
Delos was probably an importation from Dodona (see Cook, /. c, 186). Various 
other meanings of Naios have been suggested (Cook, I.e., 178, 181). For 
' god of the ships ' there is little to be said. The meaning of ' god in the 
tree-trunk', or 'he who dwells ' (in the oak), if correct, might have come in 
with Zeus, whatever form of deity Zeus displaced : whether the original 
spring-god had any connexion with the oak, or (like ^khv) with the air (wind 
in the oak-tree), is a matter I am not competent to discuss. The latter is 
possible, seeing that in historical times the god gave responses both by the 
sound of the spring and the sound of the wind in the oak (Farnell, Cults. 
I, 38). A third interpretation, 'Zeus of the Temple,' has been brought 
forward afresh by Th. Reinach {Rev. Arch. 1905, ii, p. 97), though hesita- 
tingly, and could be supported by the occurrence of Zeus ^(alto's in Syria 
[Class, (luart. 1909, p. 231) ; but it can hardly be accepted, for the god of 
Dodona must surely have antedated any temple. What seems to me very 
strong, however, against both ' god of the tree-trunk ' and ' god of the 
temple', is the fact that neither will explain, either the divination by the 
sound of the spring, or the close connexion with Acheloos, the typical running- 
water ; the oracle often told inquirers to make offerings to Acheloos (see 
Acheloos in P. W. and Roscher's Lexicon, i, p. 8), and by a curious co- 
incidence we know of the very appropriate performance of Euripides' Ache- 
loos at the Dodonaean games, Naia, in honour of Zeus Nai'os' {Syll."' 700 ; the 
games again mentioned, as N5a, C.I. G. 2908).— Buildings at Dodona, Polyb. 
4, 67 : see Kern, Dodona in P. IV. — Pyrrhos' dedications, Syll."^ 203 ; Plut. 
Pyrrh. 26 ; and Paus. i, 13, 2-3. 

'"^ Strabo 7, 325 : see Klotzsch, p. 176. 

" Plut. Pyrrh. 6. The connexion with Egypt may be illustrated from 
Phylarchos (ap. Athen. 3, 73 b = F.H. G. i, fr. 50) ; in the time of Pyrrhos' 
son Alexander, the Egyptian bean was to be seen growing in a marsh in 
Thesprotia and nowhere else in the world. Athen. 5, 203 a, though obscure, 
points to some connexion of Ptolemy I with Dodona. 

™ See App. 3, p. 426. 


ambitions. At bottom the people had^ aclose affinit}^ to the 
Epei rots. Greek clans had held the land in the old heroic 
da3's of the hunt of the Kah'donian boar ; they had been in 
part driven out or overlaid b}- the same llh'rian invasion that 
had swamped Epeiros," and, isolated in their mountains, 
the people had been slow to acquire or reacquire Hellenic 
civilization. The barbarian descent of some of the Aetolian 
tribes was a common subject of reproach ;^^ and in the fifth 
centur}', on the testimony of Thuc3'dides, their principal clan, 
the Eurytanes, still ate raw flesh and spoke the most unin- 
telligible dialect in Hellas.*^" They had kept some of the 
faults of the barbarian ; the}' were fond of raiding their 
neighbours,*^* and they had been known to be deceitful and 
cruel.*'^ But with barbarian faults went barbarian virtues ; 
bravery, and a fierce love of freedom. It was said of them 
to the end that the}'' were readier to die than any other men.*^*^ 
Alone of Greek states, save Sparta, they had never yielded 
c>Ti( j fuuL's bicadlli to the Macedonian ; and th ough onlyTn 

accident had prevented Antipatros fro m attempting to chastise 
them, their land nad m tact afiorded the one refuge open to 

tHbse^ who, for whatever cause, feared the regent's vengeance. 

In truth, the rugged countr}-, with its absence of important 
towns and the immense adaptabihty of its people to guerrilla 
warfare, was almost unconquerable. 

The origin of its famous League is lost in obscurity ; 
though perhaps first mentioned in 314, it certainly antedates 
the third century, for these cantonal Leagues were the 
common inheritance of all the states of Northern Greece. 
Compared with such Leagues as the Boeotian or Thessalian, 
it wa s a very demo rrptir form of g overnment ; hen re no 
doubt some part of its popularity. Army and people were 
synonymous ; the army was the folk under arms. The head 

*' On Aetolian nationality, see Kretschmer, I.e., p. 254 seq. ; Kiessling, 
I.e., 1015; H. von Gaertringen, Aitolia in P. IV. To Fick {HaHiden, 
PP- 52, 53) the Aetolians are substantially Greeks, as they are to Beloch. 

•=- Polyb. 18, 5, 8 = Livy 32, 34, 4. «=> Thuc. 3, 94. 

" So the ithyphallos of 290 (ap. Athen. 6, 253 d) ; AiVwXiKor ynp a\)-na(Tat. 
Til Tu>v ntXas. 

" Siege of Agrinion, Diod. 19, 68, I. 

'* Agatharch. ap. Athen. 12, 527 b. 


of the League, the strategos or war-leader, possessed very 
great power during his year of office ; as was usual in these 
Leagues, he roi-nhnifd the offices of military and civil h^ail 
Commander-in-Chief and President, though the provision for 
him of a permanent council, the Apokletoi, no doubt restricted 
his powers. Twice a 3^ear the whole folk, or all who chose, 
assembled in general council ; the one council, called Panai- 
tolika, was held before the campaigning season, in February 
or early March, and in all the principal cities of Aetolia in turn : 
the other, Thermika, was held in the autumn at Thermos after 
the harvest. The Council of the League, the synhedrion, 
has been claimed, on very insufficient grounds, as an early 
example of representative government." 

The religious centre of the League was the temple of 
Apollo Thermios. a n old sixth-centur}^ Doric building. IF" 
stood on a plain on the east of Lake Trichonis, in the very 
centre of the land. T hermos was as i t were the citadel of, 
Aetolia ; the approaches to it were difficult, and easy of 
defence. No city stood about the temple ; but a century 
later, when Philip sacked it. there were some houses and 
porticoes there, apparently rather storehouses of treasure 
than dwellings. It is described always, not as a town, but as 
a * place ' ; it was the holy place of the Aetolians, where they 
deposited their boot}', kept their archives, and worshipped 
their god. The temple itself, which seems to have stood on 
the site of a still older altar, was entirely built of wood faced 
with baked polychrome tiles ; the columns were also of wood, 
perhaps painted or faced so that no wood actually showed. 
It was not replaced by a stone building till after the sack by 
Philip V.«« 

Aetolia had already begun to expand her League prior to 
290. Her first acquisition was Naupaktos, presented to her 

" I am not concerned here with the constitution of the League. — The 
anoKXtjToi, Polyb. 20, I, — I^tt'o general assembHes ; M. Holleaux, B. C. H. 
1905, 362 (see Th. Sokoloff, Klio^ 7, p. 71), and Holleaux, ib., p. 294, 
followed by H. Swoboda, Klio, 191 1, 450, 456. The synhedrion as an example 
of representative government ; Sokoloff, /. c, p. 67. 

"'^ Description of Thermos ; Polyb. 5, 6-8. The temple is described by 
G. Soteriades, who excavated it, 'Ecp.'Apx- 1900, 161 seq. ; 1903, 71 seq. 
(the latter on the metopes). 


about 339 8 b}' Philip II ; this town gave her a good seaport 
and some of her most intelligent citizens. The incorporation 
of the Western or Ozolian Lokrians followed, at an uncertain 
time, and, still at an uncertain time, she took the great step 
of annexing Delphi. The annexation appears as an accom- 
plished fact in 290 ; the narrative would lead us to suppose 
that it took place only shortly before.^^ 

With th e commencement of the expan '=iinn one of the 
sources of strength of the democratic people appeared. The 
Aetolians, though a people composed of several tribes and 
federated in a League , had an extremely close consciousness,. 
of nation al nnj|-y Thei r League was, typically en ough, not 
so mui:h a League as an expanded Ethnos or I-olk.'"' Aetolia 
had a meaning quite other than tnat 01 (sayj Hoeotia or 
Achaea ; for instance, while a statue of Achaea or Boeotia is 
unthinkable, a statue of Aetolia seems natural enough. She 
\v^s~not .a Xeague of uni ts, she was one united people. And 
any state that entered into ' sympolity ' with her, and joined 
her League, became by that act a part of the Aetolian people. 
The man of Doris or Keos could add to his own insignificant 
citizenship something far larger ; he was not merely a member 
of a state that had federated with Aetolia ; he became and 
was an Aetolian."^ The attraction of this, as Aetolia began to 
bulk large in the world, undoubtedly made for the League's 

The new aims and ambitions which dawned on Aetolia with 
the annexation of Delphi may be dealt with later. But she 
had already formulated a polic}'' which she was to adhere to 
steadily for a good many years yet ; the policy of attempting 
t gpreserx'e a kin d of balance of power by always su pportmg^ 

" See n. 24. '"' E. Bauer, /.c, p. 13. n. 3. 

■" Sj'//.'^ 240, 248, and 249, where Boukris son of Daitas is called indis- 
criminately NnvTraKTioy, AiVcoXoj ex 'SaviruKTov, and AiVtoXd?. So Aetolius ex 
Aniphissa, AtTwXo? airo MeXtTei'os (E. Bauer, op. c, p. 61) ; and Syllr 247 
^ /. G. xii, 5, 526, ojy AtTcoXoJ^ oircoi' rcoj/ Kfi'cov. This, in spite of the reference 
to (f)i\ia, must show that the (fnXia had been turned into sympolity and the 
people of Keos had become members of the Aetolian league (contra, H. von 
Gaertringen, Aitolia in P. IV., col. 1 122); this, too, follows from the fact 
that the Keians had been made citizens of Naupaktos (same insc). The 
same inscription shows that the members of the League who were not 
Aetolians were called o[ iv AlrajXla noXireioPTei ; more briefly still we have 
AiVcoXol Ka\ ai noXds, B. C H. I909, p. 482, n. 4. 


the secon d state in the north against the first. She had 
aided Athens against Antipatros, Aiakides of Epeiros " and 
Demetrios'^ in turn against Kassandros, Pyrrhos against 
Demetrios ; and it will be seen, in the history of the next few 
3'ears, how consistentl}^ this policy was to be carried out. Of 
the forces of which Aetolia could dispose we have, as usual, 
no very clear account ; but it is safe to suppose that the 
country could raise at least 12,000 men, and probably for home 
defence a good many more. Even 12,000 would imply a 
very scanty population per square mile ; but the habit of 
allowing their young men to leave the country and serve as 
mercenaries elsewhere, — a habit not fully developed till 
later, — tended to keep their force somewhat low. Probably 
the proportion of peltasts to hoplites in their armies was 
larger than was usual ; they still used light-armed troops ; at 
a later date their cavalr}' was famous.'^ 

A glance at a map would appear to show that Macedonia 
with Thessaly wo uld be far more than a match for Epeiros 
(f'^^2ind Aetolia combined. N othing of the sort was the case. 
Macedonia was thmly peopled, and had never been able-To" 
raise field armies in proportion to its size ; still less could it 
do so now, with provinces shorn awa}', exhausted by many 
wars, and terribly in need of time to recuperate. The fairly 
trustworthy figures that remain show that the most that 
Demetrios could have raised for field service from Macedonia 
and Thessal}' would be from 30,000 to 35,000 men,'"' the latter 
quite an outside figure. He had of course a large force, per- 
haps 20,000 men, locked up in garrisons, especially in Greece 
and on his western and northern frontiers, on the latter of 
which, besides barbarians, Audoleon of Paionia had to be 
watched ; he was no friend to Demetrios.'^'^ Such garrisons, 

" Diod. 19, 74. " lb. 20, 100. 

''^ In 322 Aetolia raised lo,ooo men against Antipatros and Krateros, and 
next year i2,oco to invade Thessaly (Beloch, Bevolkerung, l86, 187). In 
279 they sent more troops to Thermopylae than Boeotia, which sent 10,500; 
12,000 would be a minimum, and, counting in guerrillas in Aetolia itself, they 
must have had far more under arms that autumn (see ch. 6). — They furnished 
peltasts and light-armed, as well as hoplites; treaty with Akarnania 'E^. 

Apx- 1905, P- 55- 
'^ See App. 3. 
'* Audoleon a friend of Kassandros, Diod. 20, 19. Pyrrhos married his 


however, were a permanent factor and were generally com- 
posed of mercenaries ; '" but it may be that, as mercenaries 
were not so numerous yet as after the Gallic invasion and the 
fall of Lysimachos, (which latter event threw open to recruit- 
ing many Thracian tribes broken by the Gauls), Dem etrios 
had to use a larger proportion of Macedonians in garrison 

■ than Was usual later, reducmg his held lorce. ~ 

The result then, as r^g-ards rlie^ iIh'hh phirf states of the 
nort h, was a balance of power. De metrios could put into the 
"held at most about 30,000-35,000 men ; Pyrrhos and Aetolia 
combined at least 30,000-32,000. It is true that Kassandros 
had fought Aiakides of Epeiros and Aetolia combined and 
been victorious ; but Aiakides had not had the full force of 
Epeiros behind him, and the country had meanwhile 
expanded very largely, in part at the expense of Macedonia, 
while Aetolia had also taken in new territory. Epeiros, too, 
h ad produced a commander who was a match for DemetnosT " 
at least upon land ; and the events of 290 seemed to have 
s hown that the t wo sides were not unequal ly matcher]^ 'Z 

If now we turn to the Peloponnese, we find existing much 
t he same state of things. H ere one power ot distin ct 
importance was still independent. Sparta w as, perhaps, as yet 

'not lully L'Oiiyciouy of the grave economic difficulties that 
were to call out the reforms of Agis and the revolution of 
Kleomenes ; at any rate, they did not affect her external 
policy. Areus her king is traditionally responsible for the 
introduction of 'luxury' into the city about this time;'^^ but 
the luxury was not particularly luxurious, from our point of 
view, and its introduction merely corresponded to what must 
have been taking place in every state since Alexander's con- 
quest had thrown into circulation vast masses of hoarded 

daughter ; and in 288, as his help to Athens shows, he, like Pyrrhos, joined 
the coalition against Demetrios (see ch. 4, n. 7). Paionia had an anti-Mace- 
donian tradition ; the Athenians in 356/5 allied themselves with three kings 
who were enemies of Philip's, one of whom was Lyppeios of Paionia ; .S///.^ 
114, Uiod. 16,22,3. Audoleon took the title of king, and as the Gauls 
frequently imitated his money he must have struck a good deal of it. 

" Demetrios' garrison at Aigosthena consisted of mercenaries ; /.G.vii, i. 
So did his garrison in the Mouseion at Athens ; ch. 4, n. 16. 

'** Phylarchos ap. Athen. 4, 141 {= F.H. G. i, fr. 43. He struck the first 
Spartan coins with the king's name and portrait ; Head '^ 434. 

1476 F 


Persian gold.. It had certainly done nothi ng to impai r the 
spirit of the proudest nation in Greece. And bparta wa s 

"ineradicably hostile to the Macedonian. The two peoples 
were probably close of kin,"'' and iSpartans believed that, 
whatever the one 'Dorian' kingdom might do in the north, 
headship in Hellas proper was the appurtenance of the other. 
Sparta consistently carried out her view. Like Aetolia , she 
had never yielded for a moment to the Macedonian. 

"Atexander had done lit^f Llitf liuuuui ol excepting her by 
name from participation in his dedication of the spoils of 
Persia ; ^^ she had given Antipatros a harder fight than had 
been any of the more renowned victories of Antipatros' king. 
During the centur}' that was to elapse between Antipatros' hard 
won victory at Megalopolis and Antigonos Doson's hard won 
victory at Sellasia, Spa rta fought desperatel}^ and unceasingly_ 
with the greater state : my piripbly rlpfpai-pH^ for fjip nrldc; wptp 
heavy against her, she returned time after time to the unequ al 
contest with a spirit that can onl}^ arouse the utmost admira- 

"fiorT bave tor her one 3'ear ot heroism against the Persian, 
It IS the most glorious epoch of Spartan history : and Sparta 
had the good fortune to find a historian who was not afraid of 
paneg3Tic, and who can still move us even with the echoes of 
his stories of the defence against Pyrrhos, the death of the 
noble Agis, the gallant struggle of Agis' greater successor. 
We have, it is true, a dark picture of the 3'ears immediately 
preceding the attempt of Agis at reform ; but it is alwa^'s con- 
ceivable that Phj'larchos deliberatel}- darkened his colours in 
order to enhance the splendour of Kleomenes. 

The p rimary business of Deme t-rinq^in thp PplnpnQ ppc;^ as 
it had been of Epameinondas ^was to arrange matters so as 
to hold Sparta jp rhprk wii-hni]f \]\ ^ perpetual interv^ention^ 
Lpameinondas' two foundations in this behalf had taken 
different courses ; while Megalopolis remained hostile to 
Sparta and friendly to whatever northern power had the 
hegemony, Messene was by no means an uncompromising 
foe of her greater neighbour,"^ and confined her undoubted 

■^9 See ch. 7, p. 178. ^0 Plut. A/t.v. 16. 

^' Messene, for instance, was prepared to aid Sparta against Pyrrhos, while 
Megalopolis joined him ; ch. 9, n. 33. 


strength, with considerable success, to ensuring her own 
independence and neutrahty. It is conceivable that Messene, 
with her fruitful plain and impregnable capital, was at this 
time the happiest place in Greece : she has no history. 
Another city, however, was committed, even more than 
Megalopolis, to the friendship of the great power of the north. 
From the days of Xerxes, x'-X rgos had been ever ready fn join 

Sparta's enemies ; and th ere \vacL- a-j:p^-m^awf w h n hmrl f he 
belief that the old r oyal line of Macedonia could trace d es rent 
trom the 1 emenid kings of Argos. A preponderating party in _.--— s^ 
the town was Iriendly to Macedonia; and Argos and Mega.\o\l^^^ 
polis acted as Macedonian watchdogs, to hold in Sparta, 

When we come to consider the figures for the several 
Greek states, w^e find that often it is not possible to say how 
their population and armed strength in the third century 
compares with that in the fourth, and in the following com- 
parison it has often been necessary to use fourth-century 
figures,'^^ of course w^ith all necessary reserve. But as, 
about the beginning of the third century, Sparta and 
Boeotia were of much the same strength as before, the 
same may be reasonably assumed for other states, where 
there is no definite reason to the contrary, as for instance 
there is in regard to Athens and Corinth, 

The Peloponnesian possessions of Demetrios, then, could 
probabl}^ supply him wdth a field force of some 16,000 to 
17,000 men,^" The other states of the Peloponnese, if united, 

*' I have the advantage here of the figures worked out by Beloch, partly 
in his book D/e Bcvolkerimg tier gricch.-rom. Welt, partly in two articles 
in Klio, 5 and 6. They are not likely to be too Jiigh ; this only renders 
more marked than ever the enormous superiority in strength of Greece to 

^^ (rt) Argos and the Argolid, with Corinth and Sikyon. Total force at 
beginning of fourth centurj' (omitting Megara with 1,500-2.000 men), 14,500 
to 16,000 men {Klio, 6, 57), say 9,500 to 10,500 on a two-thirds levy. But in 
the fifth century Corinth raised 3,500 hoplites, at the beginning of the second 
perhaps barely 1,000 (Be7'dlkerjing, 121) ; and as Corinth's service under 
the Antigonids must have been chiefly naval, deduct another 1,500, and say 
8,000 to 9,000 on a two-thirds levy, {d) Arkadia, without Mantineia and 
district. K/io, 6, 76, "JJ : total Arkadian force at beginning of fourth century 
12,000, i.e. 8,000 on a two-thirds levy, and deduct 2,oco for Mantineia, 
leaving 6,000. But I give 6,000 with every reserve on account of two new 
unknown factors ; the tendency of Arkadians to serve as mercenaries would 
lower, the existence of INIegalopolis would raise, the figure. Probably 6,coo 

F 2 


might dispose of an arm}' of perhaps 15,000 to 16,000 men, of 
which not more than 6,000 would be Spartans.^'* Sparta's field 
force had for a long time been a practically constant quantity ; 
more than 6,000 men she could not or would not put in the 
field, and of these only a proportion were Spartiates. Sparta 
had always with her her standing danger, the_Helots, and this 
no doubt did more to hamper her action than did anything 
external to herself; ''' but 6,000 men gave no measure of her 
potential strength, should it ever happen that her internal 
circumstances should be such as to enable her to use her 
reserve power. In fact, when the revolution did take place, 
her war strength more than doubled on the spot ; Kleomenes 
put 14,000 Lacedaemonians into the field at Sellasia.-*' The 
great potential possibilities of Sparta, over and above her 
actual field force, were then a matter with which an enemy 
had to reckon ; and allowing for this, and for the fine Spartan 
quality, Demetrios' position in th e Peloponne se was anythin g 
but safe. S parta often knew how to gam tne help ot hlis ; ^^ 
of Mantineia she was sure ; on the day that Messene should 
join her Demetrios would be absolutely insecure. Demetrios 
knew all this well enough ; hence his desperate and unsuc- 
cessful attack on Messene in 295, an attack sometimes treated 
as mere irrational lust of conquest. Time, in fact, was to show 
that Argos and Megalopohs were not strong enough to con- 
tain Sparta ; nnd Df^mf T^frin n vronH r-onr^^ly hnv^ hppn ab] p to 

rlairp p^TPr^ n hnl^nrP nf pr^wP|- jp fhp Ppl^p^""^'^^ without 

the adHition^l t;pryrify f nrni^hf d b y his^arrisons of me r- 
cenaries. ^ 

Granted Demetrios' policy, that it was vital ^f} l^jm i;«; i-have 

is rather low. (c) Achaea ; at least 2,000 ; K/io, 6, 75. — All told, some 16,000 
to 17,000 men. 

^* Sparta ; A'/io, 6, 67-74. Elis : total levy in round figures, 5,000 {Klio, 
6, 74) ; say 3,000 on a two-thirds levy ; on the same basis, 2,000 for Mantineia 
and district {Klio, 6, 75). Messene ; no reliable figures, but surely not under 
4,000-5,000 men ; after Sellasia it was rated for the same contingent as 
Sparta ; see Bevolkenifig, 148. 

^^ On the effect of tliis in the fifth century, G. B. Grundy in /. H, S. 
19C8, p. 77- 

*" Klio, 6, 74. 

*'' In 331 B.C. against Antipatros ; Diod. 17, 62. Probably in 280, 
against Antigonos ; Justin 24, i, 2. In the Chremonidean war; Syll."^ 214 
= /.(;. ii, 333. 


_a preponderance of strength in the peninsula, we can now / ^ ^ p 

understand his-aefaens^ during bis- five ye ar s of rule. In the^ 

north there was a balance of power between his kingdom and 
Epeiros with Aetolia. In the Peloponnese he barel}' balanced 
the independent states. He could redress the situation with 
mercenaries ; but so could P3Trhos or Areus, to both of whom 
the feel of Eg3'ptian gold was not unknown. There was but 
one permanent way to safeguard himself ^ he must control 
Central Greece absolutely. I t was no mere greed of territory, 
or love of adventure, that drove him south from Demetrias ; 
it was the iron necessity, as he saw it, that lay on him to 
secure a preponderance of power. For the moment the 
dec ision lay in the h ands of 10,000 Boeotian hoplites ; and for 
t heir sake he forgave Boeotia agam and agam^ while risking 
even hi s life to retain the country in his empire. 
""Boeotia was still the first mihtar}' state of Central Greece. 
Her levy in 279, when she sent 10,000 hoplites and 500 
cavalry to Thermopylai, shows that her federal force still 
remained at about the level at which it stood on paper at the 
beginning of the fourth century, 11,000 hoplites and 1,100 
cavalry. The introduction of compulsory military' service in 
the fourth centur}^ had compensated for an}^ loss of power 
due to the destruction and rebuilding of Thebes : the ephebe 
lists show that the causes which were to lead later on to the 
decadence of the country were not yet operative.^* The 
other states of Central Greece, without Athens — Phokis, 
Euboea, Lokris, Megara— could probably furnish some 7,000 
to 8,000 men.*^ 

What Athens could do at this time is absolutely uncertain. 
She had adopted compulsory military service after the 
disaster of Chaironeia, but, unlike Boeotia, she had dropped 
it again. The ephebe lists show that the conscription, if 

^* Fourth century : the Oxyrhynchos historian. Compulsory service and 
the ephebe lists, Klio, 6, 41-9. Forces in 279, Paus. 10, 20, 3. 

'■■' Phokis; 3,500 in 279; Va.\is. I.e., s&tBevolkernng\i7-). Euboea doubt- 
ful ; perhaps 3.000, as in 394; Bevolkerung, 179, I So. But no doubt the 
service of Chalkis was naval. Megara; 1,500 to 2,000; Klio,b, 57. This 
is much higher than Bevolkerung, 1 72, where the ephebe lists would give 
a paper total of 1,100. We cannot reckon more than 1,000 on a two-thirds 
levy, if as much. In 279 she only sent out 400 men ; Paus. /. c. Eastern 
Lokrians ; 700 in 279 ; Paus. /. c. 


continued, would have given her a field force at this time of 
some 8,000 men ; but the forces she did raise, on returning 
to a voluntary S3'stem, were trifling. She could still man her 
walls for desperate resistance to a besieger ; but in none 
of her third-century struggles do we hear of an Athenian 
army taking the field, though the destruction of her naval 
power had freed the lowest class of citizens for service on 
land, if necessary. The small force of 1,500 men which 
she sent against the Celts perhaps gives something of the 
measure of the impotence in arms of the once Im perial ci ty ; 

-she >vn^ iac;t-^ l^lllS lde Lllti t' ||rilll ..I h^-i «%n walls J lO 

be a m ih'fary farfnr nt nil, nnd rh^ '-■-^^^itiipHy mip^ oved me r- 
cenarie s. But for the actual defence of Athens, a call to arms 
could n~o doubt still raise a large volunteer force. ^" 

The strength of Central Greece, then, under Demetrios' 
control, may be fairly put at something like 18,000 to 20,000 
men,^^ if in fact he controlled all Phokis and the eastern 
Lokrians. This gave him the preponderance of power in the 
peninsula which he required. His total strength, on paper, 
was exceedingl}^ great. If the figures here arrived at for his 
available troops be added up— Macedonia with Thessaly 
some 30,000 to 35,000 men, Central Greece about 18,000 to 
20,000 men, the Peloponnese about 16,000 to 17,000 — it is 
seen that Demetrios had a potential force of somewhere from 
60,000 to 70,000 men, all Europeans, and excluding mercen- 
aries. It is not to be supposed that he could have put an}^- 
thing Hke the whole into the field as an arm}' ; °^ but what it 

'"' Athenian reorganization after Chaironeia, and the ephebe lists ; K/io, 
5, 351-5- Note that the figures on p. 354 (6,500 to 7,000 men) refer 
only to the year 323, when the compulsory system had not yet produced 
its full eftect. When in working order it would have given 500 x 30 = 15,000 
men of twenty to fifty years ; allow at least 3,000 for deaths and unavoid- 
able absences ; this gives a maximum two-thirds levy of 8,000 for the men 
of twenty to fifty years. — Abolition of the compulsory system ; Ferguson, 
Priests, 162-6 ; Athens, 127 seq. That it was abolished before 283/2 is 
certain ; Ferguson thinks in 301. It may be noted that the Ithyphallos of 
290 represents Athens as considering herself defenceless against Aetolia ; 
1. 25 KovK fxco juaxfa"^ai.— Athenian force in 279 ; Paus. 10, 20, 5, /. G. ii, 323 
= 6>//.'^ 205. See in ch. 6. 

"' I.e. Boeotia, io,coo to 11,000; Athens, 1,000 to 2,000; Phokis, (see 
n. 29), Eastern Lokris, Euboea, and Megara, 7,000 to 8,000. 

^' Plut. De?//. 43 gives Demetrios' army as 98,000 foot and nearly 12,000 
horse; and this may therefore be quite correct, if we suppose with Niese 


does mean is that he disposed of resources which, compared 
with those of any other single state, were very great indeed. 
Always omitting mercenaries, the supreme effort made by 
Egypt at Raphia produced 40,000 men, of which perhaps 
15,000 to 17,000 were of European blood ; while Syria at 
Raphia had not more, if as much, European blood in the 
60,000 troops put into the field.°^ Demet rios had easily th e 

greatest p n^y^r in 1-hA r;rAAV.cp.::>aV;ng'TTrr.rlrr 

But it is worth while for once reading the figures another 
way. If we can suppose such a thing as a united Greece, 
including Aetolia but excluding Greater Epeiros and Thes- 
saly, that united Greece could have put into the field some- 
thing like 60,000 to 65,000 men, A united Greece, that is, 
would have been on paper more than a match for Macedonia 
and Epeiros combined, and could have dealt as she pleased 
with any of the Eastern powers ; Rome apart, she would 
have held in her hand the destinies of the world. Greece, 
therefore, and no other kingdom or kingdoms, is the central 
fact in the politics of the time ; and the nightmare of the 
other kings is, that Demetrios may unite the whole of Greece 
in his own hand, and become irresistible. 

(i, 374) that the figures are meant for the total, not of what he could put 
into the field, but of his Army List, a paper catalogue of the numbers on 
which he could draw, including his garrisons, his mercenaries, and perhaps 
even his allies the pirates. 

"^"^ For Egypt and Syria, see App. 3, pp. 427, 428. 




Such being the state of things on the mainland, the position 
of Demetrios at sea and in the islands has to be considered ; 
for this purpose it will be necessary to go back a little. 

The three fleets of any importance in the Eastern Medi- 
terranean in the latter part of the fourth century had been 
the Persian, the Athenian, and the Macedonian. The former 
had become absorbed by Alexander upon his conquest of the 
Persian Empire; and the Athenian fleet, which remained 
intact until after Alexander's death, had finally gone down 
before Antipatros' admiral, Kleitos, in the two days' battle off 
Amorgos which ended the Lamian war. Kleitos may well 
have assumed the jnsignia of Poseidon ; fo r the seas east of_ 
the Carthaginian-Syracusan sphere were now definitely 
IVTacedoiliaii. — But as uii land, bU on the \V'A16\', the question 
soon arose wlio was to govern, and how ; for several of the 
contending generals had fleets at their disposal, notably 
Kassandros and Ptolemy. 
{j It was the elder Antigonos, however, who showed the 
firmest grasp of the meaning of sea-power and the firmest 
.resolution to win it. In 315, when he had disposed of 
I Eumenes, was master of most of Asia, and was definitely 
aiming at the whole empire, he had found himself confronted 
by a coalition of Ptolemy, Kassandros, and Lysimachos. To 
make head against them he required in the first place that 
Kassandros should not control the material forces of Greece, 
and in the second, that he should be cut off from his allies, 
and they from each other. Either purpose could only be 
achieved by obtaining command of the sea , or at any rate 
local command m che Aegean ; only thus could Antigonos 
reach Greece himself and cut the oversea lines of communi- 
cation which bound the coalition together. For this purpose 


the prime necessity was a powerful fleet, and he at once set 
to work, collecting what ships he could and building others, 
till he had raised 240 altogether, some of large size.^ But 
Antigonos, a man oi considerable ideas, desired more than 
this, something which force could not give him. He wanted 
p ijblir opinion '-^n bin rid^ ; nnd th ^r^ was onl}^ one puDirc 
opinion in the world at the time ; it was alike formed and 
expressed by the states of the Greek homeland, and primari ly 
by Athens.^ it was not only the desire to damage Kassandros, 
It was also^the desire to stand right with Greece, which led 
Antigonos to issue his famous proclamation that the Greek 
states should thenceforth be free, ungarrisoned, and self- 
governing;-^ with the unexpressed corollary that he would 
free them. 

Probably Antigonos really meant what he said.^ It is of 
great interest to see him, in the political struggle, making the 
same moves against Kassandros as Ptolemy II was afterwards 
to make against Antigonos' grandson when he sat on Kas- 
sandros' throne. But it is sufficient here to note that his 
proclamation hit one of the marks aimed at. Delos had long 
hated the Athenian domination ; and she seized the oppor- 
tunity of shaking herself free from her ancient mistress,^ then 
ruled by Demetrios of Phaleron in Kassandros' interest. 
This move of necessity imported alliance with Antigonos ; 
with Delos went some of the Cyclades ; and one of Anti- 
gonos' squadrons, commanded by his nephew Dioskourides, 
at once appeared in the Aegean, in order to ensure that every 
island which had as yet neglected to do so should forthwith 
become ' free ' — that is , should join its liberator.^ Thereupon, 
either at once, "or withm the next few 3-ears, the ' Leag ue of 
th e Islanders ' too k shape.' 

The idea of sonie iornl "of combination among the Islands 

' Diod. 19, 58; 61, 5 ; 62, 7-9. 

^ Beside Alexander's well-known saying, see Plut. Devi. 8, and the descrip- 
tion of Athens as (TKoni] r^y oiKovnevrji. 

^ Diod. 19, 61, 3. Antigonos, it is true, only copied Polyperchon; but the 
results were far-reaching. 

* The best commentary on his good faith is his letter to the Skepsians and 
their decree, O. G.l. 5, 6. 

'•' Autumn 314 ; see Ferguson, J.H.S. 1910, pp. 193, 208 ; Athens, p. 50, 

° Diod. 19, 62, 9. '' See App. 5. 


of the Aegean was very old, dating in fact from the original 
independent Ionian amphiktyon}^ of the Cyclades, known to 
us from the Homeric Hymn to Apollo, which had its centre 
in Delos. The fifth century had seen the great Athenian 
confederation, known as the Confederation of Delos ; here 
again Delos was the nominal centre, and at first the treasury. 
This confederation, it may be remarked, had nothing federal 
about it. It was an alliance, not a league ; and the smaller 
islands sdb'n passed from the position ot allies of Athens into 
that of tributaries. From the point of view of the Islanders, 
the difference from the original Ionian amphiktyony was 
great indeed : Jndependence had p i^^j^jpH awny, and the con - 
federation included islands of Dorian, no less than those of 

■^loniati, bl6od. 

— Dy the 'end T!rf the fourth century it seemed clear that inde- 
pendence had passed away for good and all : for no state 
which islands like the Cyclades could form, of however loose 
a construction, could exist save under the aegis of some pro- 
tecting power. Nevertheless, the islands were of importance. 
The Aegean was the home-sea of the Greek world, and the 
islands provided, not only excellent harbours, but as it were 
stepping-stones to cross that sea in every direction, no small 
thing in the days of galleys. R1l^ fhpir r£i a] vnln ^ w^is , tftat ^ 
they included Delos and the temple of the Delian Apollo. 

1/ i^'or ce nturies, under diverse political forms, Delos had bee n^ 
t n law and in sentiment the centre of the hom grsea ; and 
admiral after admiral, from Nikias and Lysa ndros downward , 
"make? his offeiiiig in hui tuiupl-e TTitTwe can almost trace sea- 
puwei by airg^amina tion ol the vo tive offe rings there brought 
to Apollo.^ 1 his was a sentiment which grew only stronger 

"wifhtime ; and in that long connected period of naval history 
which opens with the annihilation of the Athenian sea-power 
by Macedonia at Amorgos, and closes with the final defeat of 
Antiochos III by Rome at Myonnesos, every conqueror at 
sea, from Kleitos to each of the Roman admirals of the Syrian 
war, brings his gift to Delos.^ For this is the period during 

« Homolle, B. C. H. 6, 1882, pp. 152-62 ; B. C. H. 15, 168. 
^ The absence of many of the names that might be expected, especially in 
the fourth century, is to be accounted for by so many offerings being lumped 


which, put concisely, pien of Macedonian blood clr>r r|inafprl 
the Aeg;^ean ; and the Macedonian, a comparative c;i-rangpr^ 
felt more strongly even than the Greek the need of propit ia- 
"ti ng;- the local g'od. On the home-sea, Apollo was at home ; 
none could rule there save in his name.^° 

Now, when independence seemed gone for good, came the 
proclamation of the strongest ruler in the world, calling all 
Greeks to freedom. Did the Islands, under that proclamation, 
federate themselves ? The answer is to compare any existing 
Greek federation with the League of the Islanders ; the first 
glance shows that, in the latter, we are dealing with a new 
political type. The ordinary Greek federation of cit}^ states 
was formed to safeguard the freedom and autonomy of its 
several members ; and the whole (unless brought into sub- 
jection by some other power) composed a free federal 
community, a distinct state vis-a-vis other states, holding its 
own federal assembly, coining its own money, electing its 
own civil head and military officers, raising its own armed 
forces, maintaining its own independence as best it could. 
But the League of the Islanders was nothing of the kind. 
So far as we know, it had no ekklesia or assembly ; ^^ it 
neither raised nor disposed of armed forces,^^ — anyhow till 
its reconstruction in the second century under the headship 
of Rhodes, — and consequently had no military officers to 
elect; no civil head is heard of;^" the money it used was 

together in pv/xot in the third-century inventories, without names ; see 
HomoUe, B. C. H. 1S82, p. 155. 

^^ Cf. Homolle, Arc/ih'es, p. 34. 

^' The inscriptions give nothing but meetings of avvihiioi or delegates. It 
is tempting to see here one of the first tentative essays toward representative 
government, as has been done in the case of the senate of the Boeotian 
league, where also there was no popular assembly (R. J. Bonner, Class. 
Philol. 191 o, p. 405), and the senate of the Aetolian league, where there was 
(Th. Sokoloff, Klio, 7, p. 67). But we do not know how the governing body 
was chosen ; perhaps merely by lot. On the judicial functions of the Synedroi 
see J. Delamarre, R.Ph. 26, 1902, p. 291 seq. 

^^ The inscriptions of the period of Rhodian hegemony in the second 
century often refer to contingents from the Islands, ^a vrjaiariKa nXtna ; it 
cannot be chance that we have no such references in the third century (see 
Delamarre, R.Ph. 28, 1904, p. 99, n. 4). Zeno's squadron of aphracts {Syll? 
193 = !• G- ii, 5, 309 b ; O.G. I. 773 = /, G. xii, 5, ii. 1004) were Egyptian 
ships on Egyptian service ; see/. H. S. 191 1, p. 253 ; ch. 4, p. 92. 

'* The nesiarch was not such, at any rate under Ptolemy II ; see/. H. S. 
191 1, p. 251 seq. 


that of its master ;^^ and its master provided for its security 
in face of the rest of the world. Most important of all, it paid 
to that mast er taxes.^"' It enjoyed, indeed, a considerable 
measure of autonomy; to independence it possessed no 
tclaim whatever at an}^ time ol its histor}'. 

"How arid why then was it lormed, seeing that the usual 
reason for the formation of a federation— mutual protection 
against enemies — did not come into play ? It should be 
obvious from this alone that the constituent islands cannot 
have formed the League by themselves of their own mere 
motion ; states do not form a league merely that it may 
repose under the protecting aegis of a great Power. That 
the League began by reposing under the aegis of Antigonos 
and Demetrios seems certain ; ^'' and it must therefore, if not 
formed by the constituent states, have been actually formed 
by Antigonos himself. Nor is the reason far to seek. 
v^^Antigonos required the command of the sea, and the good- 

" No federal coinage is known. Demetrios' money circulated in the 
islands (Delamarre, R.Ph. 28, 1904, p. 81, no. i), and afterwards Ptolemy's 
(F. Diirrbach, B. C. H. 1904, p. 115, no. 7, a decree of the League mention- 
ing a ^€Via of S]pn;^/ia)i' IlroXe/iai'Kcoi'). 

"^ For the taxes paid to Demetrios see ch. 5, n. 4, and especially Delamarre, 
R.P/i. 28, p. 81, who shows (p. 96) how the towns of Amorgos had to borrow 
to pay Demetrios' taxes. The money borrowed by Karthaia from its own 
temple of Apollo early in the third century may have been for the same 
purpose (/. G. xii, 5, i. 544 B 2, 1. 14 seq. ; see Graindor, Musee Beige, xi, 
1907, p. 98) ; also the moneys owing by the Islanders to Delos just after 
Demetrios' fall (Syllr 209, decree of Delos for Philokles, on which see ch. 4, 
p. 108). These taxes were abolished by Ptolemy I; ch. 4, n. 39. But no 
doubt Ptolemy reimposed taxation. The important inscription as to this is 
I.G. xii, 5, ii. 1066 (being /. G. xii, 5, 533 with the addition published by 
Graindor, Musee Beige, xi, p. 98, no. 2), a decree of Karthaia in honour of 
a Ptolemaic official, Philotheros. He was not a tax-collector (see Graindor, 
/. c), for he came often to Karthaia and used to give them time to pay, and 
he could not have always been giving time for debts due to Ptolemy II his 
master ; yet what he had to collect was something in which Ptolemy had an 
interest. Having regard to the manner in which the islands had had to 
borrow from the temple of Delos in order to meet Demetrios' taxes (see 
Delamarre, /. c.\ I can only conclude that the same thing happened again, 
and that Ptolemy in effect used Apollo's temple as a State bank. The temple 
made loans to (e.g.) Karthaia to enable the city to meet its taxation, and did 
so readily, with Ptolemy behind it ; the taxes thus came in easily to the 
treasury at Alexandria without Ptolemy having to incur the odium of putting 
on pressure ; and if the loans were not properly repaid to Apollo, Ptolemy 
could and did then intervene on Apollo's behalf, a blameless display of zeal 
in the service of so useful a deity. The obscure decree from Samos, B. C. H. 
5, p. 477, no. I = Michel 370, may relate to Ptolemy's taxation. 

'' App. 5. 


will, active or passive, of the Greek states. Into each of these 
two very practical objects of statecraft a question of sentiment 
entered. In the latter case, the sentiment was that curious 
feeling which throughout history urged the Macedonian to 
stand well, if he could, with the Greek ; the Greek states 
were, therefore, to be ranged on his side, not by conquest, but 
by gratitude for the proclamation of their freedom. In the 
former case, the sentiment was the one previously alluded to, 
that in order to control the Aegean one must stand well with 
the local god ; Apollo of Delos must be, in some visible way 
understood by the world, one's own god and not the god 
of one's opponent. Mere sea-power was a matter (let us 
suppose) of acquiring bases, building ships, winning victories 
— things to be obtained by force ; but to be stable, it involved I 
the control of the Delian Apollo, and that could not be ob- f 
tained by force. Delos had just been invited to free herselt | 
from Athenian domination ; on this and similar facts Anti- 
gonos was depending to draw the Greek world to his side ; 
if he took forcible possession of any liberated island, and 
most of all of Delos, he more than stultified himself in the 
eyes of the Greek world. But if he did not take possession 
of Delos, some one else, probably Ptolemy, most certainly 
would and could ; and in that case what would become of the 
gratitude of Apollo ? 

In these circumstances Antigonos devised and formed the 
League. The small weak islands of Ionian blood grouped 
round Delos were combined into a federation, autonomous 
indeed and as free as circumstances would permit, but entirely _ 
dependent, as against other powers, on Antigonos' protection. 
It solved the double problem very neatly ; in form, Apollo 
was free before the world ; in fact, he was bound to Anti- 

The formation of the League by Antigonos, in the circum- 
stances already described, explains the peculiar fact that it 
was formed upon a purely Ionian basis. As we find it under 
Philadelphos, the islands actually known to be members, 
apart from Delos itself,^'' are Andros, Naxos, Kythnos, 

" As to Delos, see App. 4. 


Amorgos, Herakleia, Mykonos, and Keos.^* There can be no 
real doubt of the membership of Paros, los, and Syros, 
though exact demonstration is lacking.^^ Tenos and Siphnos 
are demonstrated only for the period of Rhodian hegemony, 
but were probably members throughout ; ^° of Seriphos, 
Gyaros, and Oliaros nothing is heard. There is nothing 
whatever to show that the Egyptian head-quarters in the 
Aegean, Samos and Thera, were ever members.-^ Now while 
many different lists of the Cyclades exist in ancient writers,'-^^ 
it is quite certain that Amorgos and Herakleia were never 
reckoned among them ; and the Island League is therefore 
the wider term of the two, though no doubt the islands of the 
League were often referred to as ' the Cyclades '."" All the 
more remarkable, therefore, is the non-inclusion of islands of 
Dorian, or even of non-Ionian, blood, — the Lemnian Sikinos, 
for example. As nothing in Dorian sentiment was opposed 
to such inclusion — for instance, the great Dorian islands of 
Rhodes and Kos, during the most flourishing period of the 
League, sent yearly theoriai to Delos -^ — the reason must be 
sought elsewhere ; and the explanation is, that the founder 
of the League desired to avoid the associations of the two 
confederacies that had been formed in the fifth and fourth 
centuries under the presidency of Athens — confederacies 
which had included islands of non-Ionian blood — and there- 

'* The first three in Syll? 202. Amorgos, /. (J.xii, 7, 13 and 506 b ; Herakleia, 
I.G. xii, 7, 509; Mykonos, B.C.H. 28, 1904, p. 115, no. 7, 1. 22; Keos, 
/. G. xii, 5, 1069 (this may be later; Karthaia is certain from /. G. xii, 
5, 1061). On Herakleia, see App. 13, n. 4. 

'^ Paros : gift of npo^evia to the nesiarch Apollodoros, Michel 534. los, 
presence of an Egyptian squadron and the nesiarch Bacchon, O, G. I. 7T^ 
= I. G. xii, 5 (ii), 1004. Syros was a member of the League after the battle 
of Kos (see App. 13 b). 

^^ I.G. xii, 5 (ii), 817. For Siphnos in the third century, see references, 
App. 13, p. 470. 

2' Samos ; the assembly of the synhedroi there, Syll? 202, was a very 
special matter, and not an ordinary meeting ; see Delamarre, R. Ph. 20, log, 
and Dittenberger, ad loc. Thera ; for an explanation of the nauarch's 
authority over this island, J.H.S. 1911, 257-9. I need not quote mere 
opinions, either way. 

^" Collected by H. von Gaertringen, /. G. xii, 5 (ii), p. xxi. 

23 Theoc. 17, 90; O. G. I. 54, 8. 

^^ See the Delian inventories of Hypsokles' year (279; B.C.H. 1890, 
p. 389 = Michel 833 = /. G. xi, 161), and Sosisthenes' (250 ; B. C. H. 1903, 
p. 64 = /. G. xi, 287). The Koan theoriai have been collected by Herzog, 
Koische Forschiiftge?t taid Fiinde, p. 153. 



fore went back for his model to the original purely Ionian 
amphiktyony.^^ This exactly agrees with the position of 
Antigonos in the years following 314, when Delos had just 
revolted to him from Athens, and Athens, governed in the 
interests of Kassandros, was his enemy. 

One of the first acts of the newly formed League was to do 
honour to its founder. Antigonos had grasped one of the 
ideas of Alexander, that an excellent way of holding together 
a complex of autonomous cities was to become their god,^^ 
thus gaining in each city a footing which from the political 
point of view was impossible of acquisition ; and he accord- 
ingly took his place beside Apollo as one of the gods of the 
Islanders. The exact date of the foundation of the federal 
fete of the Antigoneia cannot be ascertained, but it was 
probabl}^ coeval with the foundation of the League ; and it is 
heard of as being celebrated ever}^ second year when, shortly 
after the great victory at Salamis, the Islanders gave similar 
divine honours to Demetrios and commenced to celebrate his 
festival, the Demetrieia, in alternate years with that of his 

The Island League, naturally, could only be controlled by 
Antigonos if and so long as he possessed the command of the 
sea. The com mand of the sea, in the history of this time, is 
a phrase to be used with considerable caution. In the first 
place, sea-service was not yet specialized ; the same men 
commanded afloat and ashore ; and as, given timber, a fleet 
of galleys could be easily and quickly improvised, any power 
that possessed enough fighting-men, and controlled a few 
Greek cities to supply trained steersmen and masters, could 
at any time challenge the ruling sea power with a fair 
prospect of success. Moreover, owing to the small radius 
of action of the galley, tied to her water supply and unable to 
face a storm, the sea was not one sea but many, and a power 
might control one compartment without in the least affecting 

'-'•'' Durrbach, B. C. H. 1907, p. 223. 

''* See Kaerst, vol. ii (i), p. 398. 

" Decree of the League founding the Demetrieia in addition to the 
Antigoneia; Diirrbach, B.C. 11. 1904, p. 93, no. I ; B.C.H. 1907, p. 208. 
The Antigoneia arc mentioned again in 296; B. C.H. 1905, p. 447 seq., no. 
144 (= /. G. xi, 154) A, 1. 42 (inventory of l^hilHs I). See generally App. 5 A, 
P- 433- 


another ; for instance, the complete authority which for forty 
years Ptolemy II exercised over the Eastern Mediterranean 
never affected the seas west of Syracuse. Again, no power 
kept the sea in any force in time of peace ; true standing 
fleets were unknown prior to Augustus, and galleys, when 
laid up, quickly deteriorated.^^ The command of the sea, 
1 then, in the only sense in which it can be used in this book, 
means a purely local command in the Eastern Mediterranean 
or the Aegean, as the case may be, and means also, not that 
the power exercising it really controlled even that part of 
the sea in our sense, but that such power had a very good 
prospect, if challenged, of getting to sea a fleet that could 
defeat the challenger. 

From this point of view, Antigonos hardly commanded the 
sea from 315 to 306. Ptolemy, though not particularly suc- 
cessful, managed to keep the sea in his despite down to the 
peace of 311 ; and in 308, when possibly Antigonos was not 
yet ready for a new war, Ptolemy sailed to Greece and 
attempted to unite the Greek States, on pretext of freedom, 
under his own leadership.^^ It was an important expedition, 
for it formulated for the first time what became the standing 
j policy of Egypt for two generations ; to stir up trouble for 
! the Antigonid in Greece by posing as the champion of Greek 
■freedom. Ptolemy, however, failed; he had no resource left 
but to fight seriously; fortune threw into the scale against 
him a really great admiral ; and the result was Demetrios' 

-* Rome kept permanent fleets in commission throughout the second Punic 
war, but only for the war. On the Hfe of a galley, see the statistics collected 
by W. Kolbe, Ath. Mitt. 26, 1901, p. 386 seq., from the Athenian records. 
About twenty years was an average life for a trireme, but many were 
scrapped much earlier ; twenty-six years seems to be the longest known 

('Ao-KXrjn-iaf, p. 389). 

''■^ Diod. 20. yi ; see App. 5 B, p. 437. One may treat this expedition as 
having no effect at all on the history of the islands. But I cannot agree with 
Beloch (3, I, 149, n. 3) and Diirrbach {B.C.H. 1907, p. 220) that Ptolemy 
was in accord with Antigonos at the time. (See Kaerst ii, i, p. 63, n. 6, who 
decides against this ; also Konig, Der Bund dcr Nesioten, p. 16.) Doubtless 
they might have agreed to co-operate against Kassandros ; but their own 
enmity was deep seated, as events showed, and Antigonos could never have 
agreed to Ptolemy's attempt to refound the League of Corinth, which would 
have strengthened Ptolemy immeasurably as against himself Besides, he 
trumped Ptolemy's proposal the next year as soon as the sea was open. 
I look on Ptolemy's abortive expedition of 308 as directed essentially against 


victory over him at Salamis in 306, one of the most decisive 
naval battles of antiquit}'. Never again, while he lived, did 
Demetrios have to fight at sea. 

Thenceforth Demetrios ruled the Aegean absolutely down 
to his fall in 288, or even later. "° Ipsos, which destro3'ed the 
Asiatic empire that his father and himself had built, seems to 
have made no difference in this respect, for Ptolemy could 
not face him at sea in 294,"^ He lost territory once and 
again, as Cyprus ; but his grip on the sea itself remained 
unshakened by an}- vicissitudes on land. Though onl}' one 
inscription — the before-mentioned decree of the Islanders 
•voting him divine honours — has survived to attest his suze- 
raint}^ of the Island League, the fact cannot be doubted. 
His money circulated in the Islands, a circumstance in itself 
sufficient to imply political domination ; ^^ an island is found 
doing honour to a Macedonian proxenos ; ^^ Demetrios had 
in his service an official called nesiarch or governor of the 
islands ; ^"^ a Delian inventory refers to him simply as ' the 
king';^^ and when, at one of his lowest ebbs of fortune, he 
was rehabilitated b}' Seleukos' marriage with his daughter, 
the ruler of Asia celebrated his alliance with the sea-king by 
dedicating two silver models of warships in the natural centre 
of a sea-king's rule, the temple at Delos.''*^ 

An estimate of the naval strength of Demetrios and of his 
principal rival, Ptolemy I, can be made with confidence, 

^^ Even in 287 Ptolemy made no attempt to prevent him from crossing 
to Asia. 

'^ Plut. Dem. 33. 

*■■* Delamarre in R.Ph. 28 (1904), p. 81, Xo. i \t^ri\ir]T\p'i.iiov. 

'' los, /. G. xii, 5, (ii), l,ooi. " App. 5, A (v), p. 436. 

^* Homolle, Archives, 67, n. i. 

'^ A TpiTjprjs and a rerpfjprfi ; the former first in Hypsokles. B, 1. 78 (279) ; the 
latter in a fragment of an inventory published by Diarrbach, B. C.H. 1905, 
p. 543, no. 182, and p. 563. Homolle called the TpirjpT]i a vase. Durrbach 
also called the rfrprjprji a vase ; but no vase of this name is known, and 
I cannot agree with him that there is no doubt that a TerpT^prji of 1,700 
drachmai is the same as a Tpu]pi]s of 1,544 drachmai. Besides, there 7L'ere 
trireme-vases at Uelos, and they appear as Kpnrrjpes rptr^pr^TiKoi ; Michel 815, 
11. 131, 135 (fourth century). To call Seleukos' offerings 'vases' misses the 
whole point. Dittenberger's note on Sy//.'- 58S (Demares), 1. 31, that 
Seleukos must have dedicated this trieres before 306, as he is not called 
^ticriXfVi; is ill-founded ; he is ,Sa(riX€i'y in the corresponding passage in 
Hypsokles, and the inventories are absolutely untrustworthy as to titles, iSic, 
unless the actual erTiypn<^ii be quoted. 
14-5 G 


There is no need now to insist on the general excellence of 
the nineteenth and twentieth books of Diodoros ; and the fleet 
figures which he gives are moderate in themselves, agree 
well with one another, and are careful to distinguish war- 
ships from transports or service vessels, a very rare blessing 
in an ancient writer.^' This last fact shows incontrovertibly 
that the items in Diodoros have come down from some prac- 
tical man who knew ; it is hardly possible therefore that their 
source can be an}' one but Hieronymos, a sufficient guarantee 
of their general trustworthiness. 

Taking these figures, and reckoning warships only, it 
appears that in 315 Antigonos controlled 240 warships;"''^ in 
313 about 250;^''' at Salamis Demetrios had 118 ships in 
action, raised to 198 after the battle, which would give a total 
of somewhere about 330 ships in the possession of the two 
kings at the end of 306.^'^ For the expedition against Egypt 
Demetrios mobilized 150 ships/^ of which a good many were 
lost in a storm, and next year against Rhodes 200,'*- which 
still left a certain resers^e. Here Diodoros' figures unfor- 
tunately fail us. When Plutarch sa3's that Demetrios sailed 
to Greece in 304 with 330 ' ships V"" he of course includes 
transports. But we know that Demetrios did some building 
between 306 and 288;^^ and though Plutarch's statement 
that in 294, after losing most of his fleet in a storm, he was 
still able to collect 300 ships, must be exaggerated, it is 
certain that the fleet so collected was large enough to cause 

^' e.g. 20, 47, I ; 52, 4 ; 73, 2 ; 82, 4. On the merits of books 18-20 see 
E. Schwartz, Diodoros in P. W. He cites the fact, among others, that 
military' operations are carefully distinguished by winter quarters, a thing 
unknown elsewhere in Diodoros. 

3« Diod. 19, 62, 8. 

^'' Polykleitos with 50 ships had captured the whole of Antigonos' Rhodian 
contingent (Diod. 19, 64); if we say 40 ships, it would be a large number for 
Rhodes. Against this Dioskourides had taken the greater part of 20 ships 
(ib. 68), and Medeios 36 (ib. 69), giving Antigonos somewhere about 250 by 
313, of which 150 were at sea (ib. ']']). 

^" Diod. 20, 50. In the battle Demetrios lost 20 and captured 40 ships 
(ib. 52, 6j ; and Plutarch {Detn. 16) states, as Diodoros implies, that Menelaos' 
60 ships surrendered afterwards. 

*' Diod. 20, 73, 2. ^= Ib. 82, 4. 

*^ Dem. 23. So probably do the 190 ships given to Demetrios at Salamis, 
unless Plutarch's figures come ultimately from quite a different source to 
those of Diodoros, Douris for instance. 

*^ Diod. 20, 92, 5 ; Plut. Don. 43. 


an Egyptian fleet of 150 sail to retire without risking an 
action.*^ When to it were added what remained of the fleets 
of Kassandros and Athens, Demetrios as king of Macedonia 
may well have again controfled 300 warships, an overwhelm- 
ing force. 

The strength of Egypt at sea up to Salamis is consistently 
represented as a maximum of 200 ships.'*" After that battle 
the only fleet of which the number is known was 150 strong. 
It is interesting therefore to note that, prior to the final fall 
of Demetrios, the full strength of Egypt is about the same as 
the full strength of Carthage at the time of the first Punic 
war, 200 warships, while Demetrios, in number of vessels, 
was distinctly more powerful on paper than Rome ever was 
in the third century.'*'^ But numbers do not quite give the 
relative measure of Demetrios' strength as king of Macedonia. 
His empire included all the best material — Athens, Corinth, 
Sidon ; ^^ for marines he could ship Macedonian troops. 
He controlled the western sea-board of the Aegean from 
Nauplia to Abdera, with all its harbours and nav^al bases ; 
Macedonia and Magnesia gave him unlimited timber, the 
islands provided his galleys with stepping-stones across 
the sea. Above all he (or his father) had been the first to 
reahze that quadriremes and quinqueremes were not the 
extreme limit of human progress. These galleys, rowed by 
some twenty-five oars aside, with four or five men to each 
oar respectively,"*^ formed the fleets of Egypt till after Sala- 
mis,^*^ and formed the fleets of Rome, Carthage, and Rhodes, 
throughout the third and second centuries. History in the 
long run has justified the nations that adhered to moderate- 
sized vessels ; but on this obscure subject it is not possible 
to do more than point out that while the question of large 

'« Plut. Dem. 33. 

*" In 315 Seleukos and Polykleitos each have loo ships ; Diod. 19, 58, 5 
and 62, 4. At Salamis Ptolemy and Menelaos have 140 + 60 = 200; Died. 
20, 49. I do not reckon in guardboats on the Nile ; Diod. 20, 76, 3. 

'*'' See/. //. S. 27, 1907, p. 48 seq., dealing with Polybios' figures for the 
first Punic war. The highest Roman figure for the third century is 280 in 
the year 208 ; but these were all at sea, or ready to go. The Carthaginian 
maximum was about 200. 

" See ch. 4, n. 33. 

'•'•' J.H.S. 1905, pp. 137, 204 ; Class. Rev. xx, 75. 

•'■" Diod. 20, 49, 2. 

G 2 


versus moderate-sized warships was never properly tried to 
an issue, our scanty records of such trials as were made in 
the Eastern Mediterranean in the third century point to a 
certain measure of advantage in the larger vessels.^^ The 
performance of Demetrios' heptereis at Salamis certainly 
revolutionized existing ideas in the kingdoms of the Suc- 
cessors, and a race in building large ships began. Demetrios' 
fleet, therefore, when he was king of Macedonia, must un- 
doubtedly have contained many ships larger even than 
heptereis ; his flagship, as early as 300, had been a triskaide- 
keres.^^ These ships were adapted to carry, not only heavy 
catapults, but also a large force of fighting-men ; and it is 
consequently impossible to estimate the power of Demetrios' 
fleets merely by the number of ships, as we should estimate 
a fleet of the fourth or fifth century, though it is tolerably 
certain that the average size would fall short of the quin- 

One note of caution, however, must be sounded, in an esti- 
mate of Demetrios' strength. His total force cannot be 
ascertained by adding together the army and the fleet, for 
they overlapped to an unknown extent. To get to sea a 
fleet of 200 large warships, properly equipped with fighting- 
men, entailed a considerable drain on the land forces ; and 
no power in the third century except Rome was ever able to 
put out its full strength on land and sea at the same time. 

No other organized state, save Egypt, was ever in a posi- 
tion to think of challenging Demetrios at sea ; no other state 
had a fleet of the first class. Seleukos had little coast line 
and no naval force worth speaking of. Lysimachos must 
have had some ships; but his strength at sea cannot have 
been great till he acquired Herakleia, and the importance of 
his navy dates from after Demetrios' fall. Probably the most 
important state navies, other than those of Demetrios and 

^^ Salamis itself; Gonatas' defeat by Keraunos, Memnon 13 ; Gonatas' later 
victories, see ch. 1 3 and references. The reaction began with the battle of Chios 
in 201, apparently. — Actium was of course not an issue between big and little 

''^ Probably a vessel whose motive power, in relation to that of a quin- 
quereme, was meant to be expressed by the ratio 13 : 5, whether it had thir- 
teen men to the oar or otherwise. 

^^ See App. 10, p. 457. 


Eg3'pt, were still owned b}' three independent Greek towns. 
Herakleia and Byzantion could each dispose of an effective, 
if moderate, force ; ^^ while Rhodes, though not 3'et the 
Rhodes of the second centur}', and though her strength on 
paper was never really great,^^ had already given the world 
an object-lesson of what one free cit}^ could still do, and had 
begun to make good the proud boast that every Rhodian 
was worth a warship.^" 

But if Demetrios held absolute command of the sea as 
against any organized state, the Aegean was nevertheless 
infested by an irregular and very__gLC,tiv,e. se a-power, that 
of the pirates ; "' and they maintained themselves in force 
throughout the third centur}^, careless of whether the Mace- 
donian or the Egyptian were nominally lord of the sea. 
Piracy had been endemic in the Eastern Mediterranean from 
the dawn of histor}^ ; the rulers of the Aegean in the third 
centur}' could not suppress it, and it does not even appear 
that they took such serious steps to hold it in check as were 
taken from time to time by the little island of Rhodes. The 
evil had been a growing one toward the end of the fourth 
century, in spite of the strong Athenian nav}'. We hear of 
triremes being sent out expressl}' to watch for corsairs ; '*- 
and about 325/4 Athens was founding a colon3' on the shores 
of the Adriatic, under a leader of the auspicious name of 
Miltiades, to form a base whence corn ships could be pro- 
tected against the pirates of Etruria."'^ For this was the time 

when the Etjuscaas were th^-ffiGst-dreaded of sea-rovers;'"' 

and at the beginning of the third centur}' they were invading 
the Aegean. Demetrios had to complain to Rome of the 

■^ lb., p. 454. 

■'•' An analysis of the war between Rome and Antiochos shows that, during 
its course, Rhodes got to sea in all about 77 ships, chiefly quinqueremes and 
quadriremes, and by no means all at once. 

" Diogenianos, napnifjun 5) J9 ! wf^s 8eKn 'P08101 8(Ka vrjti. 

'' A good page in Holm (4, Sj, Eng. Tr.). 

•'■ Dockyard insc, Sj-//.'^ 530 = 7.6^. ii, 804 (not in Boeckh) ; 1. 280, fVi 

Tt)i> (prXnKrjv Twv \fiaTWV. 

^^ Syll? 153 = I.G. ii, 809. The reference to quadriremes shows that 
Dittenberger's date, 325/4, must be about right. Cf. Hypereides' speech 

wep\ Trjs (j)v\(iKris twv 'Yvpj)r)v5>i', 

"" Strabo 10, p. 477, gives as the great succession of pirates, Etruscans, 
Cretans, Kilikians ; and see Alh. Mitt. 20, 223. It must have been about 
the beginning of the third century that Etruria's mantle fell upon Crete. 


depredations of their confederates the Antiates ; *''^ and in 298 
Delos borrowed a large sum from Apollo to put herself in a 
condition of defence against the Etruscans,''^ — a year, be it 
noted, when Demetrios was in Asia. Demetrios had no 
desire for foreigners poaching in his sea; but indeed the 
power of Etruria was fast failing, and the Aegean was soon 
to be left to the home-bred buccaneer. One of the last acts of 
the broken Athenian navy, at the time when Antigonos was 
beginning to grasp at sea-power, had been to rescue the 
island of Kythnos from a pirate named Glauketas, capturing 
him and his ships, 'and making the sea safe for those that 
•sailed thereon.' ^^ Glauketas was probabl}^ acting in Anti- 
Igonos' interest ; for it is certain that Demetrios, while lord of 
[the sea, so far from repressing home-grown piracy in the 
'Aegean, was on extremely good terms with those who pro- 
fessed it. The arch-pirate Timokles aided him in the siege 
of Rhodes with some excellent ships ; ''* and 8,000 pirates 
formed part of the army with which, in 302, he invaded 
Thessaly,'''^ a figure which, if even approximately correct, 
shows that the rovers of the sea disposed of no contemptible 

All through the third century numerous traces of their 
activity are found. In Lysimachos' reign one Pythagoras 
attempted to plunder the sanctuary at Samothrake, but was 
caught by the king's troops.'^'' A new arch-pirate, Ameinias 
of PhokiSj whose force included ' pirates ' from Aetolia, took 
Kassandreia for Antigonos Gonatas.*^' Ptolemy II also em- 
ployed them, both in his war against Antiochos I, and to aid 
Alexander of Corinth against Gonatas/'^ But this did not 
hinder them from plundering Ptolemy's possessions when 
they had a mind. Twice they attacked Thera, the Ptolemaic 
head-quarters in the Aegean ; on one occasion they landed at 
Oia, in the north of the island, and were beaten off by the 
Eg3'ptian nauarch, Hermaphilos, son of Philostratos, who 

"' Strabo 5, 232. They shared in the Etruscan raids. But see ch. 2, n. 22. 
'''^ Els rrjv c})v'K(iKfjv rrnv Tvpprjiwv, I. G. xi, 1 48, 1. 1"^, and references. 
"^ /. G. ii, 331 = Syllp' 213. That Glauketas was a pirate is proved, not 
by his ships being TrXoIa, but by the reference to the safety of the seas. 

''^ Diod. 20, 97. "•'" lb. no. «" /. G. xii, 8, 150 = Syll? 190. 

" Ch. 7, p. 172. •"* Paus. I, 7, 3. /. G. ii, 5, 591 b = Syll? 220. 


fortunately happened to be there ;^^ at another time pirates 
from Allaria in Crete carried off some men, whether citizens of 
Thera or mercenaries is uncertain, and persuaded them to turn 
pirate also."" The Ptolemaic strategos of the Hellespont had 
to fortify Samothrake against them ; "^ a little later they suc- 
ceeded in sacking Aigiale in Amorgos."- At the end of the 
centur}' Rhodes took energetic measures ; a treat}- remains, 
made between her and Hierap3'tna in Crete, which provides 
for joint action against pirates and for the disposal of the 
captives and their vessels,'' doubtless only one of many 
similar treaties made by Rhodes with a view to getting the 
scourge under. But it still persisted ; for in 190 another 
arch-pirate, Nikandros, aided Antiochos HI in his war 
against Rome, putting himself under the orders of Antiochos' 

What is to be understood b}- 'piracy' in any case is a 
difficult question, since the Greek language has only one 
term for pirate and privateer. The Aetolian pirates, for 
instance, were privateersmen, like that Dikaiarchos who 
about 205 received twenty ships from Philip V with the con- 
genial order to go a-pirating in the Aegean, raid the islands, 
and help the Cretans against Rhodes.'' Aetolia had no state 
navy, and privateering was her recognized method of marine 
warfare."''' The corsairs of Illyria and Crete were sometimes 
authorized by their governments, such as they were ; '" but if 
sometimes privateersmen, they were generally pirates pure 
and simple, and even in the case of Aetolia the distinguishing 
line was often remarkably thin.""^ Naturally states backward 
in civilization drew no very fine distinctions ; some of the 

«» /. G. xii, 3, 1 291. '" lb. 328 = 5j'//.2 921. 

"1 /. G. xii, 8, 156 = Sf/r- 221. '- SyiL- 255. 

"^ Michel 21. Rhodes had always done her best ; cf. Diod. 20, Si, 3 (end 
of fourth century) ; Strabo 14, 652 (general). 

'* Livy 37, II. "•'' See on this Holleaux, B.C.H. 1907, p. 107. 

"" Polyb. 4, 6, I, the Aetolians send out 'pirates', i.e. privateers. The 
great powers did the same when they chose, e.g.. Rome after 249, Zonaras 8, 
P- 397 A ; Philip v, Livy 31. 22, 6; but Aetolia had no other force, and no 
vavixftx^^ among her oflicials. — There was of course a tendency to apply the 
term pirate to the sailors of a state you disliked, just as the Spaniards did to 
those of Elizabeth. — The movement for making do-iX/ni was in part directed 
against privateering; see Hillervon Gaertringen, Thera, iii, p. 89. 

^^ e.g. Polyb. 2, 4, 8. ™ Syll} 241, 244. 


Cretan towns cannot have been much better than Algiers, 
and even more respectable communities than the Cretan may 
not have been above winking at the sea-captain who for the 
nonce turned buccaneer. After all, it was not so long since 
even Athens had given her blessing to those of her citizens 
who might contemplate a short cruise at their neighbours' 

But the pirates who furnished Demetrios with ships against 
Rhodes and troops against Kassandros, who took Kassan- 
dreia for Antigonos, and fought for Antiochos against Rome, 
alwa3'S under the orders of an arch-pirate, were none of these. 
These must have been broken men, escaped slaves, bankrupt 
debtors, with a sprinkling perhaps of exiles and unemployed 
mercenaries,*^"— at their head some who found organized 
societ}' tedious and desired a life of adventure, — men who 
lived in this or that little stronghold round the Aegean, '^^ 
avoiding cities, but recognizing a community of interest and 
a chief. No doubt the governments could have put them 
down ; but all the governments had their hands pretty full, 
and it suited them better to wink at the evil. For pirates 
could be capable allies on occasion, and one had not to be 
too particular as to what percentage of loss fell on them.. 
Besides, apart from warfare, the pirate had a most useful 
place in the econoni}' of the old world ; he was the general 
^lave merchant. But for him and his living cargoes. State 
mines might have to close down and State forests remain 
unfelled ; so long as he did not do too much harm to one's 
own subjects, he was rather a person to be encouraged. 
Probably 'arch-pirate' was a very honourable appellation.^- 
It was only states like Rhodes, subsisting entirely on sea- 
borne commerce, or Athens, dependent on sea-borne corn, 
that felt any real interest in clearing the seas. 

" A law of Solon had put an association of men setting out for piracy (en\ 
\(iav oix"iJifvoi) on the same footing as an association of traders ; Gains, 
Digest, 47, 22 (cited by Ferguson, Athens, p. 105). 

*"' For tlie last see Plut. Mor. 223 d, no. 8 ; Strabo 10, p. 477. 

^^ Diod. 20, no speaks of them as being all sorts and coming from many 
places, TTaVTobanujv . . . (TviTpfX"VTu>v. 

*^- As among the Vikings of the tenth century, when one of the Norse kings 
of the Isles is found signing himself Archipirata ; A. Lang, N/st. of Scotlafid, 
I, 498. 




To such a kingdom, and to such power, was Antigonos \ 
again heir. 

But the power was illusory, and the kingdom built on sand. 
Demetrios could conquer; he could not govern. He could I / , 
win the hearts of strangers ; he could not keep the hearts off 
his own people. The Macedonians had been accustomed to 
a line of kings who were the fathers of their people, kings 
whom the common man served willingl}^ because he felt 
that they were national kings, having much in common with 
that same common man whose acclaiming voice, as one of the 
Macedonians in army assembled, was necessary to call them 
to their kingship. The king was not king of Macedonia, but 
of the Macedonians ; a true distinction. The common man 
would have been lo3'al to Alexander's house had he had the 
chance; but the old line was extinct, and the common 
Macedonian, the sturdy farmer who served in the phalanx 
and had helped to conquer the world, and who had the full 
pride of what he had done, had lost his bearings. Kassandros 
had possessed his full share of militar}' and political abilit}^, 
and seems to have done his duty by Macedonia as he con- 
ceived it ; but the memory of Kassandros was execrated as 
that of a butcher, popular tradition believed that he had paid 
for his sins by a peculiarly horrible death, and it was at least 
doubtful whether any popularity that Demetrios might gain 
as the husband of Antipatros' daughter was not more than 
counterbalanced by the dislike he incurred as the husband of 
Kassandros' sister.^ The Macedonian army, too, had merely 

• ' See Pint. 7)e///. 37. For ;i moralizing view of Kassandros' crimes, Just. 
16, I. He was eaten of worms (Paus. 9, 7, 2), a fate also assigned to Herod 
the Great (Joseph. Ant.Jiui. 17, 169) and Herod Antipas (Acts 12, 23). No 
doubt he really died of consumption (Euseb., Schoene i, 231), like his own 
son Philippos (Paus. 9, 7, 3) and Antigonos Doson (Polyl). 2, 70, 6). 


hailed him king in default of a better choice. Taken all round, 
it was a situation that required extremely careful and delicate 
handling on his part if it were to attain to elements of 

. But careful handling of the situation was the last thing 

that occurred to Demetrios. Bred up as a king over Orientals, 
where Oriental methods of rule were not merely pardonable, 
but certainly expected and perhaps required, he merely 
traTisferred the same methods to his government of the 
proudest nation in Europe. The generous impulses with 
which he had started on his career in Europe were running 
low ; and ostentation began to replace ideas. Moreover for 
the last twelve years or more he had been worshipped as 
a god by subservient partisans in Greece,- a proceeding which, 
(countenanced by the old Antigonos in Asia as a useful 
political measure), had appealed to the weakest side of 
Demetrios' nature. It had not even been an ordinary State 
worship ; he had lived in the Maiden's Temple like Athene, 
he had given his oracles like Apollo. And at the same time 
he had learnt the bitter lesson that those who treated him as 
a god could not be trusted as men ; and disillusionment had 
^rown with self-exaltation. The natural consequences fol- 
lowed. What Macedonia required was rest from fighting for 
a while, and a statesmanlike government that should work 
among the people for forgetfulness ofthe past and attachment 
to the present ruler ; what i t got was careless tyranny and 
ceaseless war. Men might have pardoned tRe nTefe~^ow of 
the pla3'-actor, the luxury of the court, the double diadem and 
the slippers of gold and purple, even the display of the 
famous mantle that pictured the whole host of heaven, — the 
mantle that was left half finished and that the proudest of his 
successors dare not wear.^ They might have thought it little 
that the king, following the conceit of Kassandros' half-mad 

^ Demetrieia in Athens, Plut. Dein. 12, Douris ap. Athen. 12, 536a; at 
Delos, B. C. H. 1904, p. 93, 1907, p. 208 ; in Euboea, celebrated alternately 
at Histiaia, Chalkis, Eretria, and Karystos, 'E(/). 'Ap^. 191 1, p. i, no. i, 1. 36. 

^ The dress and mantle come from Douris, Athen. 12, 535 f; and Plut. 
De)>i. 41 (end) must be from the same source. Notwithstanding the form in 
which Athenaios quotes Douris, there cannot have been more than one mantle 
with this particular embroidery. 



brother Alexarchos, should let himself be addressed as the 
Sun/ or be portrayed charioted on the globe of the earth as 
its master;^ for these things were done in a Greek city, and 
not in Macedonia. But there were more serious matters than 
Eastern trappings and vanities. The Macedonians had been 
accustomed to kings who went in and out among them,' 
hearing complaints and doing justice ; Demetrios made him- 
self inaccessible to his subjects, and his most faithful officer 
has spoken to his harshness/' If on the road he received 
petitions, it was to drop them into the first river he crossed. 
It is recorded how an old woman once shamed him into doing, 
for a time, the duties of a king. Envoys were subjected to 
long dela}', or received with small courtesy. Add to this his 
long-continued absences from Macedonia, and it must have 
been clear to close observers that little effort would be needed 
to cut away the props of Demetrios' power. 

But Demetrios himself seems to have had no misgivings. 
To him Macedonia was but a means to an end ; his ambition 
was'Th'e recovery- of his fathers kingdom, and his rule over 
Asia, probabi}' as a step to universal dominion. In the 
autumn of 289, being at peace with the world, he commenced 
his preparations to this end. A fleet of five hundred ships 
was to be got together, and the invasion of Asia undertaken 
on a grand scale ; the dockyards of Corinth, Chalkis, and 
Piraeus, the shores of the lake on which stood the Macedo- 
nian capital of Pella, once itself a seaport, rang with the axe 
and hammer of shipwrights ; the king himself hurried from 
point to point, ordering, superintending, taxing his mechanical 
talent for new and stupendous inventions ; it was now that he 
launched those galleys of fifteen and sixteen men to the oar 
which excited universal admiration, not merely for their 
beauty, but for their speed and efficiency at sea. 

The other kings saw the imposing exterior and the mighty 
preparations, and took fright. That winter a new coalition 

* The Ithyphallos of 29o(Douris ap. Athen. 6. 253 d) addresses Demetrios 
as the Sun ; and he may have been so portrayed on the mantle. P'or 
Alexarchos see ch. 7, p. 185. 

^ Douris ap. Athen. 12, 536 a ; at the Demetrieia at Athens. 

" XaXtnoi Kni Tjxixyi, Plut. De)ii. 42. Probably from llieronymos, see F. 
Reus?, Hicronyinos von Kajdia, p. 108. 


was formed by Seleukos, Ptolemy, and Lysimachos, to curb 
the would-be world-conqueror, and they succeeded in persuad- 
ing Pyrrhos to break his treaty, partly by taunting him with 
having allowed Demetrios to carry off his wife. It is probable 
that the coalition was also joined by Audoleon, king of 
Paionia. The plan of campaign was comprehensive ; 
Lysimachos was to invade Macedonia from the east and 
Pyrrhos from the west, while Ptolem}^ was to sail for Athens 
with his fleet and attempt to raise Greece. Seleukos appar- 
ently had no part in the projected operations.' 

The coalition succeeded in striking the first blow. In the 
spring of 288,^ before Demetrios was ready with his prepara- 
tions, and while his existing fleet was, apparently, still laid up 
for the winter, the three kings started together. Leaving 
Antigonos to look after Greece, Demetrios hurried to meet 
the invaders of Macedonia ; in face of the danger by land, 
there was no time to think of getting the fleet to sea. Of the 
three kings, Ptolemy had far the easiest route, and was not 
opposed. Some time prior to July, i. e. before the end of the 
archon-year 289/8, an Egyptian squadron appeared before 
Athens ; the actual ships sent were probably the division of 
aphracts or light cruisers mentioned afterwards as under the 
command of one Zeno, for the battle fleet must have been 
engaged in blockading or observing Demetrios' naval bases, 
Corinth and Chalkis. On the advent of the Eg3^ptians the 
nationalist party in Athens rose and overthrew the existing 
government, with the usual accompaniments of such a 
change ; the then magistrates went, or were driven, out of 
office, and were replaced by others, and Athens declared 
herself independent. Demetrios had no time to attend to the 
town ; what Antigonos was doing is not known, but no doubt 
Demetrios had most of the troops immediately available ; and 
although Antigonos held the Piraeus, Zeno the cruiser captain 
succeeded, shortly before the eleventh day of Hekatombaion 
288, in throwing a supply of corn into the town, for which the 

' Plut. Don. 43, 44. He does not mention Audoleon, but the reference in 
Syll? 195, 1. 15 to Audoleon — (Tv\y\(^pywv (h Ti)v eX6u^ep[i']ar Tr]i [7r]oXei — before 
the storming of the Mouseion shows that he joined the coalition. 

* On the date see App. 2, pp. 418-22. 


Athenians passed him a vote of thanks on the spot. Athens 
was now safe for the time, and Ptolemy was free to turn his 
attention elsewhere.^ 

In Athens the change of government, brought about with 
the help of an Egyptian fleet, made the political situation very 
precise and definite. Every one had to make up his mind to 
which of the two parties he belonged. All Demetrios' friends, 
such as Phaidros, were of course excluded from office ; ^" but 
an}' enemy of Demetrios might serve the nationalist govern- 
ment, whatever had been his previous political label. We 
know a little of some of the more prominent nationalists of 
this time. 

First came Demosthenes' nephew Demochares, whom the 
nationalists at once recalled from exile. He was a man passably 
honest as politicians went ; it was claimed for him that he was 
one of the fewdemocrats in Athens who had never served under 
any other form of government. His sphere was _finance , his 
policy retrenchment.; he is said to have had some success here, 
and doubtless a revision of expenditure was entirely necessary 
after six years of Demetrios. He had been responsible for 
the repair of the walls and the strengthening of the fortifica- 
tions of Athens at the time of the four years' war against 
Kassandros, and also for the alliance with Boeotia : and he 
was to put one considerable feat to his credit before he died. 
But on the whole, in spite of undoubted patriotism, he gives 
an impression of ineffectiveness. He was a man of words 
_rather than of deeds ; his traditiorTwas that of the speaker, 
and for the time being the day of formal oratory was over. 
He indeed made himself remembered as one who did not 
hesitate to say what he thought ; but his provocative manner 
seems to have achieved little for him but a nickname and 
a number of enemies, among them the historian Timaios. It 

* The evidence for all this, together with other systems of dating, is con- 
sidered in detail in App. 2, on the question of the date of Diokles. Zeno's 
squadron (I.G. ii, 5, 509*^= Syll? 193) is mentioned again a little later as 
policing the Cyclades after they had become Egyptian ; O. G. I. 773 = /. G. 
xii, 5, 2, 1004. 

^" Phaidros does not appear between Xenophon's year 2S9/8 (see App. 2) 
and that of Nikias Otryneus 2S2/1, i.e. as long as the nationalist government 


is unpleasant too to think that he had been among those 
whose idea of making war on Kassandros had been to attempt 
to drive Aristotle's school out of Athens through the medium 
of Sophokles' law. At best, it shows that he could only look 
back and not forward ; for with the philosophers lay the 
future. The truth about him may well be that he deserves 

(neither much praise nor much blame, but that he was simply 
the mediocre nephew of a great statesman, and heavily 
handicapped by that fact.'^ 

Philippides son of Philokles of Kephale was a well-known 
writer of comedies, and a great personal friend of King 
JLysimachos of Thrace, in which capacity he had been able to 
render much service to Athens after Ipsos, securing the 
release of the prisoners whom Lysimachos had taken. He 
first came into prominence in the years that followed Deme- 
trios' liberation of Athens in 307 ; he seems at the time to 
have been a moderate democrat, bitterly hostile to Stratokles, 
and making full use of his position on the comic stage to 
assail him unsparingly. The friend of Lysimachos and the 
enemy of Stratokles was bound to be the enemy of Demetrios 
also ; and when the democratic government fell after Ipsos 
and was replaced by a moderate oligarchy, Philippides, though 
not holding office in the new government, found himself so 
far in accord with them as to go as their envoy to Lysimachos 
in 299/8 to ask for corn for the city. There cannot at this 
time have been much difference of opinion between the 
moderate democrat Philippides and the quondam oligarch 
Phaidros, who held office under this government. The 
careers of the two men, thus for a time moving in the same 
orbit, furnish an instructive comparison ; for after 295/4 they 

" Laches' decree in his honour ; Plut. X orat. vit. 851 D. — His retrench- 
ment, cf)eianfj.('p(o tcop vTrap^of tcoi/ ; (he succeeded, aorist). — Timaioson Demo- 
chares, Polyb. 12, 13. His nickname Parrhesiastes, given in the otherwise 
worthless story in Seneca, de Ira iii, 23, is borne out by Polyb. u. s., rrcTrappt]- 
CTtWrat TToXXii. — He defended Sophokles, Athen. 13, 6iof. On this law, soon 
after repealed, Diog. L. 5, 38. No philosopher was to teach in Athens without 
a licence from the government. — I am compelled to say '■passably honest' by 
the story in Diog. L. 7, 14 (semble, from Antigonos of Karystos), that he 
once asked Zeno to make interest for him with Antigonos, to Zeno's disgust. 
^ See generally, Susemihl i, 552; Beloch 3, 2, 374; Swoboda, Deviockares, 
in P. W. ; Ferguson, Athens, passim. Wilamowitz' celebrated but vitriolic 
picture in his Antigonos vo)i Karystos goes too far. 


diverge sharply; while Phaidros joined Demetrios, Phihppides,. 
finding a moderate position no longer tenable, swung straight, 
back and cast in his lot with the nationalists. Exactly when 
he took this step is not known ; he is not heard of again 
till after Demetrios' fall.'- 

Glaukon son of Eteokles of Aithalidai, better known as the 
brother ofChremonides than on his own account, must have 
been a comparatively young man, though he was general 
twice under this government and agonothetes in 282/1. He 
had the prestige of an Olympian victory in the chariot race ; 
he was also proxenos of Rhodes. But his more important 
activit}'' falls later.'^ 

But the best man at Athens at the time seems to be the one 
of whom we know the least. Olvmpiodoros wa s both a 
democrat and a friend of Theophrastos, and a noble example 
that a Peripatetic could still be a patriot. He was a veteran 
of the wars against Kassandros ; and in the year of Ipsos, 
when the whole world was in arms against Demetrios and 
Antigonos, he had won a great name b}' meeting Kassandros 
and beating him back from Elateia, one of the last acts of 
Athens in Demetrios' interest.'* He had naturally taken no 
part in the events of 30 i/b- 296/5 ; but he must be the archon- 
eponymos of 294/3, '^he year of the attempted union of parties. 
The attempt, as has been seen, miscarried, and Ol3'mpiodoros 
was not again active till Demetrios fell. 

These were the men of the reaction of 288 ; and to a certain 
extent they were ready to fight for their beliefs. But either 
they or the people were not ver}' earnest in the matter ; for 

'^ The decree for Philippides, passed in 285/4, is the chief authority (/. G. 
ii, 314 and ii, 5, 85 = Syli.- 197) ; see also Plut. Don., passhii. It seems 
that all the instances given by F'iutarch of the abuse of Stratokles by Philip- 
pides belong to 307-301. Perhaps in 294 political pasquinades were dan- 
gerous ; and Stratokles must have died soon after. — Why Ferguson exiles 
Philippides {Athens, p. 144) I do not know. Had he thus suffered for his 
opinions, the decree for liim must not only have mentioned the fact but 
gloried in it, like Laches' decree for Demochares. 

" I.G. ii, 1291 = Sylir 200; other references in the notes to Syll? 200 
and 222. The Olympic victory must come early in his life. Date of the 
Rhodian pro.xeny unknown. The Delphic decree is later, and Syll."^ 222 
much later. 

'* Paus. 10, 18, 7 and 34, 3. The Elateians dedicated a bronze lion at 
Delphi ; and a statue of the Phokian leader Xanthippos was set up there ; 
statue-base />'. C.J/. 1899, p. 388 ; see U. Ph. IF. 1912, p. 477. 



, /-they took no steps to improve the Athenian mihtary organiza- 
^ tion, or to restore compulsory service ; ^^ the kings their 
friends would save them from Demetrios. One can only 
praise them half-heartedly. But the beginning was good. 
Olympiodoros called for volunteers ; a few of the citizens 
remembered (it is said) the glorious deeds of their ancestors ; 
and at the head of w^hat men he could raise, including boys 
and grey-beards, Olympiodoros attacked Demetrios' garrison 
in the Mouseion, the garrison that held the city down. The 
'Macedonians' sallied out and were beaten in the field; 
a captain of mercenaries, Strombichos, came over with his 
men ; Olympiodoros followed up and stormed the fortress, one 
Leokritos being the first man over the wall ; and for the 
moment the city was free. Leokritos' shield was dedicated 
to Zeus, the Giver of Liberty; and those who fell at the wall 
were buried beside the long row of tombs where lay the men 
who, during two hundred years, had died for Athens.^''' 

While these events were passing in Greece, Demetrios 

had hurried north to meet the invaders of Macedonia. He 

first faced Lysimachos, as the more pressing danger. But the 

temper of the Macedonians was unsatisfactory, and a steady 

dribble of men left his camp, nominally to go home, in reality 

to join Alexander's old general. Demetrios suddenly altered 

his plans, and turned instead to face Pyrrhos, who had 

reached Beroia ; he at least was no companion of Alexander's. 

i Bjit the piU ars of sand suddenly crumbled away. The 

I Macedonians rel used 10 figliL any loa g^ f - for -Demetrios' 

I ambition. Part of the army, crowning themselves with the 

Epeirot oak-leaf, went over to Pyrrhos openly ; the rest 

commenced to plunder the camp ; a few had the courage and 

honesty to tell Demetrios to his face that all was over, and 

that he had better sa\'e himself. The king changed his 

15 Ch. 2, p. 43. 

i*" Paus. I, 26, I seq., and 29, 13. — Decree for Strombichos ; /. G. ii, 317, 
2,\^ ~ Syll? 198, 199. — All that is known of Olympiodoros comes from 
Pausanias. But Pausanias says he saw the tombs (i, 29, 13), a picture at 
Eleusis (i, 26, 3), and decrees preserved in the Akropolis and the prytaneion ; 
this, coupled with the decree for Strombichos, gives no reasonable room for 
doubt. The name of the commander of the garrison, Spintharos, shows that 
the ' Macedonians' were entirely composed of mercenaries. 


clothes and fled to Kassandreia ; P3rrhos and Lysimachos 
divided Macedonia between them.^' 

At Kassandreia Demetrios found Phila. That sorely tried 
woman could support the blows of fortune no longer, and 
took poison. The reason is given as the loss of Demetrios' 
kingdom ; but this at best can be but the last of many reasons. 
Her life as Demetrios' wife can hardl}' have disposed her to 
desire yet to live ; and it adds but a small touch to her 
traged}^ that in a few 3'ears she might have seen a king of 
another type in her son.^"^ 

From Kassandreia Demetrios, giving up Macedonia as lost, 
hurried to Greece to save what he could from the wreck. 
La3ang aside all insignia of royalty, he went round the cities 
in the garb of a private man, the traditional method of the 
playwright for exciting sympathy. But Demetrios was 
something other than a king in a tragedy, and his talents were 
never either so conspicuous or so formidable as when he 
appeared to be hopelessly beaten. There was a sudden 
reversal of the situation. The friends who commanded his 
garrisons rallied to him ; his mercenaries stood by their oath ; 
he secured Boeotia by restoring to the Thebans their consti- 
tution ; and almost 'before the world had realized that he was 
not absolutely powerless, he was under the walls of Athens 
with a formidable army. 

The alarm of the Athenians was great. They had fought 
against him before, and been forgiven ; but were they not 
this time committed past redemption ? They had received 
Ptolemy's fleet, and honoured his captains; they had stormed 
the Mouseion, and slain Demetrios' men ; they had recalled 
Demochares, and proclaimed Athens free. They had put 
their trust in princes, and rejoiced openly at Demetrios' fall ; 
and Demetrios was at their gates, while Ptolemy's fleet was 
back in harbour, and the princes were far off. Messengers 

" Plut. Z^^w. 44, 45 ; Pynh. il, 12 ; Just. 16, 2, 2-3. I can make nothing of 
the story in Paus. i, 10, 2 of Demetrios defeating Lysimachos ; it will not fit 
either here or in 294, where Niese (i, 365) placed it. Polyaen. 4, 12, 2, 
(Lysimachos takes Amphipolis), should belong here. — The line of this parti- 
tion of Macedonia is unknown : Klotzsch, p. 197, suggests the Axios. Cer- 
tainly Kassandreia belonged to Lysimachos. — Bronze coinage struck by 
Pyrrhos as a Macedonian king, Head-, p. 230. 

" See Beloch 3, i, 237. 

H76 H 


were hastily sent off to both Pyrrhos and Lysimachos for 
help ; but for some reason unknown Athens was not minded 
to close her gates and stand a siege, as she had so often done 
before and was to do again : possibly the walls were out of 
repair, while Demetrios still held Piraeus and all the forts. 
The arm of the flesh had failed ; Athens turned to the arm of 
the spirit. It is one-xif the least honourable episodes in her 
histor}'. She called on the aged Polemon to save her ; and 
though the revered head of Plato's School would not break 
his rule of quietude, he, as Achilles in like case, sent his 
friend. At the head of an embassy of philosophers, Krates of 
the Academy went out to meet Demetrios, and conjured him 
to spare the violet-crowned city in the name of her illustrious 
dead. Demetrios received his honoured suppliants with the 
respect due to their persons and their position. He was per- 
haps glad of an excuse to spare the city of memories ; he was 
perhaps not uninfluenced by the fact that the arm of the flesh, 
in the shape of Pyrrhos, was coming unpleasantly close ; 
certain it is that the philosophers gained the indulgence 
pra3^ed for. Demetrios had already raised the siege when 
Pyrrhos arrived hot-foot to the help of the cit}^ There 
remained nothing for him to do, and he and Demetrios made 
peace on the basis of the status quo ; P3Trhos had no mind to 
leave his share of Macedonia at Lysimachos' mercy, while all 
that Demetrios wanted was freedom to turn elsewhere. 
Pyrrhos entered the city, sacrificed to Athene, and went' 
his wa^'s, after brusquely telling the people that if the}' had 
any sense the}' would never admit another king within their 
gates. Athens was yet free.-"^ 

Demetrios still had a considerable power. He retained 
all his Greek possessions but Athens ; ^ " he possessed a fair 

''■* Plut. De»i. 45, 46; Pyrrh. 12. The date is spring-summer 287 ; Deme- 
trios required time to collect a new army, whenever lie left Kassandreia. — 
I think no one now doubts the embassy of philosophers. — I cannot agree 
with Beloch (3, i, 240, n. i), that Lysimachos was a party to the treaty 
between Demetrios and Pyrrhos. Rather, the treaty under which Pyrrhos 
and Lysimachos partitioned Macedonia contained, as was inevitable, a pro- 
vision for mutual defence against Demetrios ; while Pyrrhos' treaty with 
Demetrios was doubtless (as Klotzsch suggests, p. 201) partly dictated by 
fear of Lysimachos. 

^^ He may also have taken Lemnos and Imbros from Athens either in 287 
or 286 ; Beloch 3, i, 240, n. i. 


force of mercenaries, and a good three-quarters of his fleet, 
even if Lysimachos had secured the ships at Pella ; above all, 
he felt himself unhampered by any form of obligation. It 
^was too late to think of conquering the world ; but it was not 
too late for great adventures and a great revenge. Of the 
coalition there was one king who in Demetrios' eyes stood on 
a different footing to the rest. Accommodation with Ptolemy 
or Pyrrhos was possible ; with Lysimachos it was not. The 
reason of the intense personal hatred which these two felt for 
one another is unknown to us; the fact of it is attested 
over and over again, and written in every page of their 
histories. And as after Ipsos, when Demetrios had lost one 
kingdom, he had at once sailed to attack the king of Thrace, 
so now the same causes produced the same result ; he had 
lost a second kingdom, and his first thought was to turn 
and rend his personal enemy. Equipping what ships he 
could, and putting on board every mercenary that could 
possibly be withdrawn from the force left with Antigonos 
in Greece — he shipped 11,000 foot and some horse — he 
sailed for Karia, where he still held Miletos and Kaunos. 
The Egyptian fleet made no sign ; Demetrios may still have 
been more than a match for it at sea, and perhaps Ptolemy 
was not sorry to see him quit Greece and throw himself 
against some power other than Egypt. Demetrios landed 

his force successfully at Miletos. There he was met by 

Eurydike, Phila's sister, the divorced wife of Ptolemy Soter, 
with her daughter Ptolemais, to whom Demetrios had been 
betrothed when he made peace with Ptolemy in 299.^ Deme- 
Jtrios. married Ptolemais, and in the spring of 286 set out 
northward, summoning Lysimachos' cities as he went. 

Hfijiad -been popular in Asia; Lysimachoawas not. Some 
of the cities opened their gates ; some he stormed ; men 
gathered to the great adventurer's standard. Certain of 
Lysimachos' old generals came over with money and troops ; 
even the impregnable Sardis fell into Demetrios' hands. 
Then came hurrying south Agathokles, Lysimachos' capable 
son, with all the power he could raise. Demetrios felt 
unable to risk an encounter in the field, and retired inland 
through Phrygia, with the desperate purpose (it is said) 

H 2 


of crossing the Armenian higiilands into Media and raising 
the upper satrapies against Seleukos,— a design feasible 
enough could he have reached them, as Diodotos of Bactria 
was to show; but Agathokles hung on his rear, cutting 
off all supplies, and at last forced Demetrios in sheer hunger 
over the Tauros passes into Seleukos' province of Kilikia. 
The rest of the tremendous story hardly concerns this history. 
It is not necessary to relate in detail how Seleukos first spoke 
his father-in-law fair and then attacked him ; how Agathokles 
closed the Tauros passes, so that there was no escape north- 
ward ; how Demetrios, driven to bay, turned on Seleukos, 
defeated him in every action, and mastered the passes into 
S3'ria, till Seleukos trembled even for his throne, and men 
flocked to Demetrios' banner believing that he would yet 
win a third kingdom ; how at the critical moment Demetrios 
fell ill, and his army melted away like the summer snows ; 
how Seleukos at length hunted him into a corner ; how 
Demetrios tried one more attack with his starving few, and 
even so was invincible, till Seleukos, taking his courage 
in both hands, dismounted and ran forward bare-headed 
to the little band of mercenaries who had kept their oath to 
the end, begging them to come over and save useless 
slaughter; how Demetrios and his friends made one last 
vain attempt to reach Kaunos and the ships ; and how 
at the end, in utter starvation, he surrendered to Seleukos. 
The world was to see no such man-hunt again till the days of 

The foregoing narrative has anticipated the course of 
events in Greece, where Demetrios in the autumn of 287 

^' Pint. Dcm. 46-9. There also belong here Polyaen. 4, 7, 12 ; 4, 9, 2 & 3 & 5. 
— On the dates. Demetrios may have crossed to Asia autumn 287 or spring 
286 ; the former is more likely, as it allows a reasonable time for his marriage 
with Ptolemais. Anyhow, his campaign against Agathokles falls in 286, and 
his captivity spring 285. See generally Beloch 3, 2, 66. As Demetrios died 
in the third year of his captivity, and as Antigonos, who certainly died 240/39, 
reigned fort)'-four years from Demetrios' death, Demetrios must have died in 
283 prior to July and surrendered in 285 prior to July, (286/5) ; I see no room 
for doubt. W. Kolbe, Ath. Mitt. 1905, p. 109, who puts Diokles in 287/6 
(see App. 2), has to make Demetrios leave Macedonia summer 287, and 
appear before Athens the same autumn. This seems to me impossible. But 
Kolbe agrees that he surrendered in spring 285. — Ferguson, Athens^ agrees 
that Demetrios crossed in 287, but puts his captivity in 286 (p. 151), which 
appears to give insufficient time for the intervening events. 


had left Antigonos as his governor, with probabl}^ no more 
troops than were necessary to garrison the fortresses, and a 
treasury by no means overflowing. Antjgonos regarded hinv 
self merely as a governor, and during 286 confined himself 
to the measures necessary to preserve intact what yet 
remained to his father. Meanwhile the new government in 
Athens was not idle. So soon as Demetrios withdrew from 
the city walls in 287, it had begun to send envoys to the 
various kings, with a view to strengthening its position. 
Philippides was sent to his friend Lysimachos, others to 
Audoleon of Paionia and Spartokos of the Crimea. They 
were to announce that Athens was free, and to pray for help 
to maintain that freedom and to recover Piraeus and the other 
forts, help in men if possible, in money anyhow ; for the 
vital necessity of the city was corn. Spartokos sent them 
a little corn ; Audoleon not quite so much, and some 
promises ; Lysimachos sent his compliments, and said that 
Philippides had behaved very nicely. Obviously, Providence 
was going to help those who helped themselves. But what- 
ever steps Athens might take to help herself, she could not 
feed herself; and next year another embassy went off to 
Lysimachos, headed by Demochares in person. The orator 
succeeded where the poet had failed ; Lysimachos, in the 
throes of his struggle with Demetrios, was persuaded that 
any enemy of the latter was worth his support ; the close- 
locked doors of his treasury opened a little way, and the 
democracy of Athens honoured its ambassador for returning 
with thirty talents in his pocket, the gift of a king. It 
was not perhaps as bad as it sounds ; Demochares no doubt 
would have put it, in private, that he had plundered one king 
of the means to fight another. But many of those who 
acclaimed him were to live to realize the difficulties of casting 
out Satan by the help of Satan.-^ 

But thirty talents were by no means enough to be of much 

" Philippides to Lysimachos, Sy/l? 197, 1. 31 ; the words in 1. 36, koi vjrep 
TiwToii' 7U)v 77[(i]i'ra)i' Tv<)W(iKii ^ejxapTvpi]K(v avTon n [incri^fvs npui rovs npea- 
(Bevovrns 'A6t]vcu(ov, coupled with the fact that no result of the embassy is 
mentioned, show Lysimachos' evasion of an answer. — Audoleon : /. G. ii, 312 
= Syl/? 195; Spartokos, I.G. ii, 311=6///.^ 194. — Demochares to Lysima- 
chos ; Laches' decree. 


use to Athens. Demochares returned to Lysimachos, and 
this time succeeded in extracting a hundred talents from 
him and twent}'' more from his son-in-law, Kassandros' son 
Antipatros. He also moved for an embassy to go to 
Ptolemy ; they went and returned with other fifty talents. 
The nationalist government had now plenty of money.^"' 

Lysimachos, however, took more effective measures against 
Demetrios than subsidizing Athens. He approached Pyrrhos, 
and persuaded him to break the treaty he had just made with 
Demetrios and to attack Antigonos. It was the second time 
that Pyrrhos had so acted ; but, to be just, it is extremely 
probable, on this occasion, that the prior treaty under which 
Pyrrhos and Lysimachos had partitioned Macedonia would 
contain a provision for mutual aid if either were attacked by 
Demetrios, and, as Demetrios was now attacking Lysimachos 
in Asia, this provision would have come into force, and 
Lysimachos might very properly claim that it must override 
any subsequent arrangement between P3Trhos and Deme- 
trios to which he was not a party. Pyrrhos at once proceeded 
to invade and overrun Thessaly; Antigonos could save 
nothing but Demetrias ; and Pyrrhor-^trt^rappears-'in Ihe 
list of Thessalian kings. He also attacked Antigonos' 
garrisons in Greece ; but it does not appear what success 
he had, or whether the attack was pressed.^* Pyrrhos may 
have been busy elsewhere ; for though it appears that his 
recovery of Kerkyra must fall later,^^ it may well have been 
about this time that he succeeded in conquering the southern 
part of Illyria and incorporating it in his kingdom.^'' 

On the other hand, Antigonos was in no position to do 
more than stand on the defensive. Possibly he tliought 
it his business to do so ; but probably also he had no more 
men than were required for garrisons. He was not even in 
a position, quite apart from any treaty that his father ma}'' 

^^ Laches' decree. 

^^ Plut. Pyrrh. 12. The list of Thessalian kings in Eusebios, Schoene, 
p. 241 ; see Beloch 3, 2, 74. 

^^ Paus. I, 12, I ; Just. 25, 4, 8. One would naturally suppose it took place 
soon after Demetrios' fall ; but Klotzsch, p. 215, rightly points out that 281 is 
the earliest possible date, because of Ptolemaios' age ; even so, he would 
only have been fourteen at the time. 

'« App. ///. 7. 


have made with the town, to attempt to recover Athens ; on 
the contrary, it was Athens that was desirous of attacking 
///;//. Some time between autumn 287 and spring 286 Demo- 
chares had achieved the important success of driving Anti- 
gonos' garrison out of the fort at Eleusis ; an attempt made 
by Antigonos to recover the place had been defeated by 
013'mpiodoros, in whose ranks Eleusinian volunteers found 
a place. And throughout the 3'ear 286 the nationalists were 
rejoicing in the belief that the da3's of Macedonian rule in 
Athens were definitely numbered. So long as Demetrios 
still commanded an army, the}^ could count on the support of 
the other kings ; and thanksgiving was the business of the 
hour. In January a decree was passed thanking Spartokos 
for his help. By April contracts were got out for the com- 
pletion of the long-deferred work on the Stoa in the holy 
precinct of Eleusis. In June a vote of thanks for his assist- 
ance was accorded to Audoleon, and another to an officer of 
his, who had successfully landed the corn at one of the open 
Athenian roadsteads. Philippides, who had been elected 
agonothetes for the new year 286/5, ^^'^^ busy with prepara- 
tions for a special festival which he intended to celebrate in 
honour of Demeter and Kora, as a memorial of the liberation 
of Athens. Demochares and his fellow envoys were home, 
bringing with them 170 talents from Lysimachosand Ptolem}^ 
Above all, the recovery of the Mouseion and of Eleusis had 
shown plainly that garrisons of mercenaries were neither 
incorruptible nor invincible ; and in the autumn of that year 
the rccoverj^of Piraeus itself was hopefully taken in hand.-' 

Piraeus must have been the key which Demochares had 
used to unlock Lysimachos' treasur}- ; and Lysimachos doubt- 
less was read}^ to see that he received an adequate return 
for his 130 talents. Unfortunately the Athenians made the 

" Decree for Spartokos in Gamelion of Diotimos' year, 287/6, Sy//.- 194. 
Decree for Audoleon in Skirophorion of the same year, 5>//.^ 195 ; and for 
an ofificcrof his, same date, /. G. ii, 313 (fragmentary). — Philippides' agono- 
thesia. .S)'//.- 197. — Eleusis was in Athenian hands by Mounychion of Dio- 
timos' year 287/6, which dates Demochares' capture of the fort, given in 
Laches' decree ; for the date, and circumstances of the work on the Stoa, see 
H. Lattermann on Sjy//." 538 in A7/o, 6 (1906), p. 140. This is confirmed by 
J.G. ii, 5. 614 c = Sj'//.^ 505, which shows that in Menekles' year 283/2 
Eleusis had already been in Athenian hands for some years. 


mistake of trusting to L3'simachos' gold rather than to 
their own swords, and discovered,, too late, tha t .all mer- 
cenarics were not mercenary. HeigJ^leides, who held Piraeus 
for Antigonos with 2,000 men, was 103'al ; but two of the 
Athenian generals, Hipparchos and Mnesidemos, managed 
to open communications with one of his captains, a Karian 
named Hierokles, as had been done before with Strombichos. 
Hierokles led them on, promised to open the gates, and then 
laid the matter before Herakleides ; at the appointed time the 
gates were opened ; Mnesidemos and 420 Athenian burghers 
were admitted, and promptly cut to pieces. The Athenians 
buried them near the men who had stormed the Mouseion ; 
but for that 3'ear enterprise w^as checked.^^ 

This chapter may fittingly conclude with some reference 
to the fate of _ the Aegean after Demetrios' downfall,-'' a story 
bound up with that of the somewhat enigmatical Phoenician 
who is known to us only under the Greek name of Philokles.'^*' 
This man, a prince of Sidon, had long been in Demetrios' 
service ; ^^ and, as he appears later on as king of the 
Sidonians, he no doubt commanded the contingent of ships 

^^ Polyaen. 5, 17. I cannot put it quite as early as Bcloch does (end 287 
or early 2S6), for Athens had first to get the money to bribe Hierokles, which 
entailed three separate embassies to Lysimachos, and they must have been 
able to show the king some good reason why he should give 100 talents. 
The reference to Lydia in Polyaenus goes with the appointment of Hera- 
kleides, not with the Athenian attack. — The tombs, Paus. i, 29, 10. 

-^ The facts that have to be accounted for, and which the following sketch tries 
to explain, are : (i) That there is no trace of any fighting ; we go straight from 
Tyre, Sidon, and the sea-command in the possession of Demetrios to the 
same in the possession of Ptolemy. (2) That Philokles was originally in 
Demetrios' service. (3) The extraordinary honours conferred by the Delians 
upon Philokles, and the language of their decree for him. (4) The new and 
extremely powerful position subsequently occupied by Philokles, an Oriental, 
in the Egyptian service. — The two documents of primary importance are the 
decree of the League of the Islanders found on Nikouria, Sj//.'^ 202 = /. G. 
xii, 7, 506, and the decree of Delos in honour of Philokles, Sy//.- 209. The 
former can be dated with confidence to 280 ; as Samos is in Ptolemy's hands, 
it must be later than Lysimachos' death in autumn 281 ; and it must precede 
by a reasonable interval the first celebration of the Ptolemaieia at Alexandria 
(for which it is part of the preparations), in the winter of 279/8. The first 
Ptolemaieia on Delos seem to have been founded in 280 (see ch. 5, n. 50), an 
additional reason for assigning the Nikouria decree to that year. 

^^ Philokles was son of Apollodoros, /. G. ii, 1371 = Michel 1261. The 
Phoenician names of both f;ither and son are unknown. For theories as to 
who Philokles was, see R. Dussaud, AVr'. Arc/i. 1905, p. i ; F. C. Eiselen, 
Sidon, 1907. I have not seen this last ; see R. E. G. 190S, p. 205. 
^' Syll^ 176, with Beloch's commentary' 3, 2, 257. 


sent by Phoenicia to Demetrios' fleet, perhaps the most 
important sent by any one country."-^ Demetrios still held 
Tyre and Sidon in 287,^'^ and Philokles must have been high 
in command in his navy at this time. But when news came 
to the fleet at Miletos that Demetrios was flying eastward 
before Agathokles, the question of self-preservation at once 
occurred to the Sidonian king. The enormous importance 
of Phoenicia to Ptolemy, if he could obtain it, makes it 
exceedingly probable that he had already sought to open 
negotiations with Philokles ; and in 286 Demetrios' adhe- 
rents in Miletos were thinking of saving themselves, each in 
his own way. The Milesians opened their gates to one of 
Lysimachos' generals. That part of the fleet which remained 
loyal transferred its head-quarters to Kaunos ; but Philokles, 
unlike the standing mercenaries who followed Demetrios to 
the end, went over in comfort to the wise and wealthy king 
of E gypt, ca rrying with him part of Demetrios' fleet, the^ 
Phoenician ships at any rate, perhaps others. This put 
Tyre and Sidon peaceably into Egyptian hands, an d trans- 
ferred the whole balance of sea-power. Next year, on 'Deme- 

^" Philokles' position and powers under Ptolemy had nothing whatever 
to do with his being king of the Sidonians, as I gather was thought by 
J. Delamarre [Rev. Phil. 20, 1S96, p. no), Beloch (3, 2, 257), and Bouche- 
Leclercq (vol. iv, addition to i, 155). It is true that a king of Sidon seems to 
have commanded the Phoenicians in Xerxes' fleet itnder the Persian admiral 
of that division (see the writer in J.H.S. 1908, p. 207), and that a king of 
Sidon commanded the Phoenician contingent at Knidos, Diod. 14, 79 ; and 
no doubt Philokles commanded the Phoenician contingent of Demetrios ; 
but such commands have nothing to do with the great powers presently 
bestowed on Philokles by Ptolemy. The proof of this is, that his successors 
in the ofifice of nauarch were not kings of Sidon, but Kallikrates a Samian, 
Patroklos a Macedonian, and Hermaphilos a Cretan {see /.H.S. 191 1, 

P- 253). 

^^ It is obvious that, so long as Demetrios held Sidon, Philokles could not 
serve any one else. Demetrios held Tyre and Sidon, and garrisoned them 
extra strongly, at some date between 300 and 296, Plut. Bern. 33. Against 
this, the statement of Paus. I, 6, 8 that Ptolemy took 2vpovi re kuI Kimpnv on 
Antigonos' death in 301 is valueless. According to Plutarch, Bern. 35, in 295 
Lysimachos took Demetrios' cities in Asia, and Ptolemy took Cyprus except 
Salamis. If Ptolemy also took Phoenicia, surely Plutarch must have men- 
tioned it ; for, as it is, the passage deprives Demetrios of more than he really 
lost ; for instance, he kept Miletos and Kaunos. Phoenicia cannot have been 
lost, of course, between 294 and 2(S8 ; and probably not till a year or two after 
288. For in 2S7 Demetrios is still supreme at sea, though he must have lost 
some Macedonian ships to Lysimachos ; had he also lost the powerful Phoe- 
nician contingent, his supremacy must have vanished. 


trios' surrender, that part of the fleet which had remained 
loyal returned to Antigonos ; and Philokles rounded off his 
work by capturing for Ptolemy Kaunos, the last possession 
t^of the Antigonids in Asia,"^* 

For twenty years Demetrios, through every vicissitude of 
fortune, had been unquestioned Lord of the Sea ; and he had 
now lost the sea without a struggle, owing to the faults of his 
policy on land. It was a marvellous piece of fortune for 
Egypt. She had not struck a blow; the command of the 
sea had just fallen into her hands as a ripe pear falls ; and 
with it WTnt much else, Phoenicia, the Islands, Delos. It 
may have been some little time before the rule of Egypt was 
established on what Egypt herself considered a thoroughly 
sound basis; there is reason for supposing that Ptolemy II 
did not consider himself free from all danger till Lysimachos 
fell at Kouroupedion.'^"^ But the actual liberation of the 
Islands, that is to sa}', their transfer from the rule of Deme- 
11 trios to that of Ptolemy, can be dated with tolerable 
certainty to the year 286, or very early in the year 285 ; ^^ 
it thus coincides with the only time that can be assigned for 
the defection of Philokles. That the two are connected is 
an obvious inference. The men of Delos gave Philokles his 
place alongside Ptolemy as their deliverer;^' and whether 
he was actually the instrument used by Ptolemy to bring 

^* Miletos belonged to Demetrios in 287, Plut. Deffi. 46. It certainly 
passed to Lysimachos about this time, Beloch 3, 2, 271 ; of. Sy//.~ 189. The 
evidence is not very good ; but the fact that Demetrios at the end tried to 
reach Kaimos, where he expected to find his ships (Piut. Deni. 49), seems 
to show that Miletos had already gone over, and the fleet, or what of it was 
loyal, had gone to Kaunos. — It has often been thought that Philokles' capture 
of Kaunos (Polyaen. 3, 16) may belong to the first Syrian war [circ. 273) 
rather than here. But it is by no means certain that he was then alive ; for 
though the date when Kallikrates succeeded him cannot be fixed for certain 
more nearly than some time prior to May-July 270, it is quite possible that 
he was already nauarch before the repudiation of Arsinoe I {see/. H. S. 191 1, 
p. 253 seq.). — It is possible that Demetrios also held Erythrai and that it also 
passed to Ptolemy at this time ; it was Ptolemaic circ. 278, see Syll? 210, and 
a decree of Erythrai published by G. Zolotas mentioned R. E. G. 1909, p. 310. 

'■'' This depends chiefly on the dating of the foundation of the first Ptole- 
maieia to 2S0; see ch. 5, n. 50. The vase foundations which are here (after 
Schulhof) referred to as the first, second, and third Ptolemaieia are to be 
distinguished from the federal festival of the Island League (see note 43) of 
the same name ; see App. 11. 

^^ See note 40. ^'' Syll? 209 ; %t^post. 


about the secession of the Islands from Demetrios or not, 
the phrase at any rate recognizes that it was his action, in 
transferring the balance of sea-power/'- which had enabled 
Ptolemy to cany out his polic}', a polic}^ which the Islanders 

For certainl}^ if we ma}' take the Nikouria decree literall}^, 
Demetrios' downfall was popular in the Islands. The Anti - 
gonid rule, which had begun with the proclamation offreedom 
and autonom}', had ended with the imposition of heavy 
taxation. But the wealthy Ptolemy began b}- remitting all 
taxation;-''' it is also said that he 'freed' the cities and 
' restored their ancestral constitutions '. As a fact, he did 
not restore an}' ancestral constitutions ; the inner autonomy 
of the cities had never been diminished; while as to outer 
relationships, what Ptolemy did was to continue the League 
under his own officers and his own rule.^" But the 
phrase in fact had no real reference to a real constitution. 
It had acquired a stereotyped meaning in Greece ; to^ 
' restore the ancestral constitution ' in a state meant to over- 
throw a tyrant.*^ Demetrios, that is to say, was treated as 
an Overthrown tyrant ; and the liberated League passed 
under the benevolent aegis of Egypt. Ptolemy was not a 

^^ Seepos/. 

"' There has been much division of opinion as to whether the words tcis 
■noXfii Toir fi(j(])np''oy Kovfpiaas in the Nikouria decree iSyll." 202) mean that 
taxation was hghtened (Beloch 3, i, 341, n. 4, and formerly Delamarre) or 
abolished (Dittenberger nd loc, and Delamarre in a note to /. G. xii,7, 506). 
A cursory collection of parallels appears to show that there are two distinct 
phrases, (i) rav (i(T(f)opas Kovcpiaai, to lighten tribute; O.G.I. 90 (Rosetta 
stone), 1. 12, where no ambiguity is possible, (ii) Knvcf)i(Tai rcbv fla(f>ni)wv ras 
TToXftr, to abolisli tribute. Diod. 13. 64 Kov(pi(T<ii rbv br^pov rm' ela(pnpoyv. 
O. G. /. 751 ; the people of Ambiada ask .Attalos II to remit their taxation 
altogether, Kovcpia-m ifint (iTTo TO)!' /ii'o ToKi'iiTuii' ; he lets ihem off part. O. Lj. I. 
4, 1. 14 eKn{ff)i(T<Tf rap nnXiv (rcof ti(T(pni)o>v understood from context ; meaning 
not doubtful). Consequently .S>//,- 202 seems to mean abolisliins; tribute. 

^'' It is of course possible that Ptolemy dissolved the League and then 
re-formed it; but if so it was done very quickly. For the Nikouria decree 
shows that the League had paid divine honours to Ptolemy I, and this must 
have been done prior to the association of his son (afterwards Ptolemy II) 
with him in the kingship, or both must have been worshipped, just as they 
were a little later (see Ii. C. II. 1907, p. 340, no. 3. a decree of the League 
for Sostratos, being O. G. I. 67 enlarged). The League therefore was in 
existence under Ptolemaic overlordship at some date prior to 285/4. As 
Demetrios was still supreme at sea in 287, the League must have come under 
Ptolemy's power in 2!i6 or early in 2S5. 

*' Instances in App. 5, pp. 437, 8. 


hj^pocrite ; the whole * hberation ' was no doubt perfectly 
genuine ; but the nature of things was too strong for him. 
He had to protect the Islanders, just as Antigonos and 
Demetrios had had to do ; he had to reimpose taxes in 
order to pa}' for the fleet which policed their waters ; 
similar causes produced similar effects; and his rule became 
to all intents and purposes precisely the same thing as the 
rule of Demetrios.*^ 

The Islanders, meanwhile, welcomed Ptolemy as 'Saviour', 
built him an altar at Delos by that title, decreed to him 
divine honours, and carried the decree into effect by the 
foundation of the federal festival of the Ptolemaieia, the 
festival in which the League of the Islanders celebrated 
the worship of the god Ptolemy Soter.*'^ They presumably 
abolished at the same time the federal festivals of the 
Antigoneia and Demetrieia, which are not heard of again. 
Philokles, too, came in for his share of decoration. The 
pressure of Demetrios' taxation had compelled many of 
the Island communities to borrow the money to discharge 
their obligations to the tax-gatherer, and they had of course 
borrowed from the most natural source, the temple of Apollo 
at Delos. Apollo was pressing for repayment, and could not 
always get it, though some communities borrowed from 
their own local temples in order to pay their debt to him.^* 
Apollo had to appeal to Ptolemy, and Ptolemy ordered 
Philokles to take the matter up.^^ An admiral in such cases 
had powers denied to a god ; and Philokles set the prece- 
dent of using a great fleet as a debt-collecting agency. His 
arguments were irresistible; the Islands paid ; and the grate- 
ful Delians voted to Philokles the most exceptional honours. 

A gold wreath of i,ooo drachmai was nothing out of the 
common ; but in addition they passed a resolution to sacrifice 
soteria on his behalf both to the gods of Delos in Delos and 

^^ On Ptolemy's taxation of the Islands see ch. 3, n. 15. 

*^ Mentioned B. CH. 4, p. 323, no. 2, and again B.C.//. 1907, p. 340, 
no. 3. In its original form, and before enlarged to take in the worship of 
Ptolemy II also (/). C. //. 1907, /. c), it must be the laodeoi num for 
Ptolemy I to which the Nikouria decree refers. Founded circ. 286 ; 
see n. 40. 

*^ See a case ch. 3, n. 15, 

" What follows is founded on Syil."^ 209. 


to Zeus the Saviour in Athens, in return for his piety towards 
Apollo and his benefits to the people of Delos. It is this 
most instructive decree, passed by the Delians in Philokles' 
honour, which has enabled us, taken in conjunction with the 
statue which the Athenians erected to him,^*^ to reconstitute 
to some extent what happened. It marks, for one thing, the 
formal reconciliation of those old-CTTenries, Athens and Delos, 
under the aegis of the king of Egypt, a happy turn of events 
for wHicTi Philokles was largely responsible ; and it shows 
that the honours decreed to Philokles related to other matters 
beside debt-collecting. Debt-collecting for the Temple was 
' piety toward Apollo ' ; it conferred no benefit on the people 
of Delos as such, it had no possible connexion with Athens, 
and it could hardly be rewarded with sacrifices offered under 
the high-sounding title of Soteria, * the feast of deliverance.' 
Philokles therefore must have done some great thing which 
was equally beneficial to Delos and to Athens ; and no 
explanation seems possible other than the transfer of the 
control of the sea to Ptolemy, the event which had enabled 
Delos and Athens alike to become ' free '. 

As was the greatness of his services, so was the measure 
of his reward at the hands of his new master. Egypt 
governed her conquered provinces by means of strategoi or 
generals ; but the Islands, at any rate those in the League, 
could not be treated like conquests such as Cyprus or the 
Red Sea littoral, for they had not been conquered.__In theory 
the League of the Islanders was an autonomous state in 
friendly relationship with Egypt. No strategos of the 
Cyclades was therefore ever appointed ; but the powers 
that he would have exercised, had he existed, were conjoined 
with the office of admiral of all the fleets of Eg^'pt and 
certain high civil powers, and the whole was bestowed upon 
Philokles. In effect he became Ptolemy's Viceroy of the 
Sea. His powers were continued in the line of Egyptian 
nauarchs or admirals ; but no Asiatic, in any Macedonian 
kingdom, was again to hold a position comparable to his. 


*" I.G. ii, 1371 = Michel 1261. 

" On his powers, office, and successors, see my paper, J. II. S. 1911, 
p. 251. 



Demetrios' first act after his surrender was to send oft 
messages to his commanders in Corinth, Piraeus, and Deme- 
trias, telhng them to trust no orders that purported to come 
fmm him, even if sealed with his ring, but to treat him as 
, >^ad and to hold the fortresses for Antigonos. He was 
/ ^ under no delusions as to what Seleukos would do. Seleukos 
was not a cruel man ; but in fact he had no choice. He 
treated his prisoner, indeed, as a king, assigning him a royal 
residence with pleasure gardens and chases ; but he kept 
him too strongly guarded for escape to be possible. Pas-.. 
sionately Antigonos offered to put every fortress he still 
held into Seleukos' hands, and to come himself as hostage, 
if Seleukos would free his father ; but he offered in vain ; 
the king could not take the responsibility of again loosing 
TJemetrios upon a troubled world. On the other hand, 
Lysimachos, whose hatred mastered his accustomed miserli- 
ness, offered Seleukos an immense sum of money to put 
Demetrios to death. The king of Syria rejected the bribe 
with scorn ; and the ' dirty piece of savagery ', as he called 
it, merely deepened the distrust which he already felt for 
the king of Thrace. It was evident indeed already that at 
no distant date Asia would not be large enough to hold both 
^ kings. ^ 

The surrender of Demetrios made large alterations in the 

balance of power and in the relations of the several states 

to one another. Lysimachos was now secure in his half of 

I Macedonia, and had gained important accessions of territory 

^n Asia Minor; Pyrrhos was little less secure, it seemed, in 

^ Plut. Dem. 50-2; Diod. 21, 20, i. The place of Demetrios' captivity 
was the piece of land called Chersonese in a loop of the Orontes near 
Apameia ; a natural prison, but low-lying and marshy. See Strab, 16, 752. 


the other half of Macedonia. Ptolem}^, without a struggle,/ 
had added to his empire the best part of Phoenicia, thq; 
Islands of the League, and the command of the Easterr 
Mediterranean. Alone of the kings, Seleukos, on whom the 
brunt of the fighting had fallen, had gained nothing b}i^| 
Demetrios' captivity. 

Pyr rhos, in possession of half of Macedonia and of most 
of Thessal}^, in addition to his own greatly enlarged kingdom 
of Epeiros, must have appeared to the Greek cities to be the 
most powerful prince of the peninsula ; for the centre of 
gravity of Lysimachos* kingdom lay far away on the Helles- 
pont, and his real strength was not so much in men's eyes. 
Pyrrhos' friends the Aetolians had, in consequence, to 
consider their position. Tli£ir_cansistent polic}', as already 
explained, was to support the second state of the peninsula 
against the first. Recently they had been supporting Pyrrhos 
against Demetrios ; but now that Epeiros had become the 
first power, the}' were careful to reinsure themselves by 
offering their friendship to him whom they considered the 
second, Lysimachos : and two towns, called respectively 
Lysimacheia and Arsinoe, were founded b}'' them in the 
heart of Aetolia, in honour of Lysimachos and his consort 
Arsinoe ; the queen may even have been given the honorary 
title of founder of her name-city.- 

But if, to Aetolia, Pyrrhos appeared threatening, P3'rrhos 
himself took a very different view. He knew the real 
strength of L^-simachos ; he knew the old man's consum- 
mate ability in the field ; he knew that nothing but fear of 
Demetrios had kept him in check. With Demetrios a ca:ptive, 
and Aetolia at the best uncertain, he looked round for a 
make-weight, and thought to find one in Antigonos. 

Demetrios' message to his captains in Greece had been, 
to all intents and purposes, his abdication ; and Antigonos 
had__thencefortJi to act as though he were sole king of the 

^ Good relations are shown by SyN." 196. On the two towns, Strab. 10, 
460 ; sec Beloch 3, i, 249, n. 4. While certainly Aetolian foundations, I do 
not know why Arsinoe should not have been honorary ktIo-tijs, as a compli- 
ment. Both are often mentioned. Arsinoe : Polyb. 9, 45 ; /. (J. ix, 2, 61 
= G. D. I. 1439 ; G. D. I. 2529, 2530. Lysimacheia : Syll? 924, 1. 5 ; 'E</). 
'A/JX- 1905, p. 55 ; />'. C //. 26, p. 274, no. 508 ; 6^. Z?./. 2527, 2531. 





pussc^sions of his house in Greece and as though Demetrios 
were dead, though he did not call himself king as long as his 
father li\ed.'^ His position was far from an easy one in the 
spring of 285. To rule Greek cities with any success, a king 
required an assured kingdom of his own at his back : and 
more than ever did he require it if he refused or was unable 
to find a place in such cities as their god. For, (apart from 
some fiction of divinity), the king had no place at all in the 
city state, and no standing in regard to it save such as his 
own kingdom might give him ; if he had no other kingdom, 
"he had no standing at all. It was not possible for any 
kingdom to absorb -the city states- the city remained an 
enclave, an island in the kingdom, however cordial its rela- 
tions with the king. The kingdom could no more assimilate 
the autonomous city than the constitution of the autonomous 
city could assimilate a king. The oil and the water might 
lie very comfortably in the same vessel ; but they could not 
mix. But a king whose kingdom consisted only of enclaves, 
of cities in which he had no place, would have been no real 
king at all ; he would have been an anomal};. theoretically 
unthinkable and practically impossible. 
Antigonos roiild i- |pt h^yf rnaini-ained himself for a moment 

^ There are two conflicting statements in the tradition here. One is that 
Antigonos reigned forty-four years (Medios in Lucian, Makrob. 11 ; Euseb. 
I, 237 Schoene, i.e. Porphyry), the other that he reigned ten years in Greece 
before he reigned in Macedonia (Euseb. /. t.). As his death in 240/39 is 
certain, being fixed by the reign and death of Uemetrios II as given by 
Polybios, a reign of forty-four years is correct as from the death of 
Demetrios I in 284/3. But if ten of these elapsed before he became king 
of Macedonia, the latter event took place in 274/3 ; this is out of the question, 
for the third life of Aratos makes him become king of Macedonia in 01. 125, 
i. e. 277/6 at latest, and Athens was officially sacrificing for him in Polyeuktos' 
year, 275/4 ; /. G. ii, 5, 323 b. The ten years' kingship in Greece is there- 
fore a separate tradition from the forty-four years ; and this is the more 
certain because Porphyry, in turning regnal years into Olympiad years, gives 
Antigonos thirty-seven years (see the table in Beloch 3, 2, 76), while some 
of the Eusebian tables have attempted to reconcile the inconsistent figures 
ten and forty-four by giving Antigonos thirty-four years only (i.e. in Mace- 
donia). It appears then that Antigonos was king, i.e. had the royal title, for 
forty-four years, 284/3 ^^ 240/39 ; that he exercised independent rule in 
Greece for ten years before acquiring Macedonia, i.e. from 287/6, when 
Demetrios crossed to Asia, to 277/6, when he became king of Macedonia ; 
and that he was king of Macedonia thirty-seven years. See generally, and 
for details, the discussion of the lists of Macedonian kings in Beloch 3, 2, 
pp. 71-S1 ; and see further App. 5, n. 6. 


as king in Greece without some kingdom of his own to fall 
back on. His kingd om, in fact, at this time was his army of; 
mercenaries, and nothmg else fand what he had really in- \ 
herited was a number of garrisons posted in different Greek ' 
cities. Probably they were none too large for their work ; 
Demetrios must have taken with him all the available floating 
supply of troops. More mercenaries could be raised ; but 
the supply of Greek mercenaries was no more unlimited 
than were Antigonos' pecuniary resources. Mercenaries 
had to be fed and paid ; and Antigonos, with no revenue of 
his own to draw on, had to tax the city states under his 
rule, as Demetrios had done. He started with a burden of 
unpopularity due to the heavy taxation imposed by Demetrios 
for his expedition to Asia. His own taxation must have 
been resented, and caused unrest ; unrest necessitated en- 
rolling more mercenaries, which in turn entailed heavier 
taxation ; Antigonos was held in a vicious circle from which 
there seemed no escape. It was not exactly a brilliant 
opening for the reign of a philosopher.^ 

Of the three possible ways of ruling Greek states, he was 
absolutely committed by inheritance to the system of garri-' 
sons. Demetrios had begun his career in Greece with a 
programme of freedom and union of hearts ; he had been 
completely disillusioned, and it must have been an axiom 

'' No direct reference to Antigonos' taxes exists; but they must follow 
from those of Demetrios. Demetrios received a yearly revenue of 200 talents 
from Euboea (Diog. L. 2, 140, no doubt grossly exaggerated); he exacts 
a special contribution from Athens or Thessaly, Plut. Dew. 27 ; his total 
revenue was said to be 1,200 talents a year, Ael. V. H. 9, 9, sed quaere ; the 
Islanders rejoice at the abolition of his taxes, Syil." 202. On his taxation of 
the Islands, see J. Delamarre in /\.P/i. 28, 1904, p. 81, and ch. 3. n. 15 : what 
is true of them is probably true of his other possessions. His €ta(f>opni in 
5j//.^ 202 are certainly regular taxes and not special requisitions, elanpd^eis. 
H. Francotte {Alusre Beige, I907) P- 53) makes €la(f)npu the extraordinary 
requisition, as opposed to (fn'ipos, the ordinary tribute ; and so Konig, £>er 
Bund der Nesioien, p. 80. It may mean so occasionally, e.g. O. G. I. 4, 1. 10, 
where the context is clear ; but as a rule (i(T(f)op(i is the ordinary tax, so 
called to avoid the hated sound of (j}i)pos, while the special requisition is 
ela-npa^is. See Suidas, /"r^firrtXeirt (3), (which neither Francotte nor Konig 
quotes), where some unknown Stoic distinguishes the tyrant who makes ras 
«| imiyKiji Kdi p.e6' v/ii/jeoy (la-npo^ds from the true king who makes ras avp 
Xoyo) K(u (piXnvdpodnla tcov (l(T(f)opa}p (]ninTrj(T€ii. Consequently Demetrios' 
elacjiopcu were, as Delamarre supposed, a regular system of taxes ; and if in 
the Islands, then elsewhere. 

1476 I 


i^i th his so n that a union of hearts was of no use as practical 
jjolitics. The third way, that of ruling through some party 
or individual in the city without a garrison, was to be 
Antigonos' own choice ; but once the garrison was there, 
it could not be withdrawn. The only strong points about 
his position were, that his arm}^, being entirely composed 
of mercenaries, was competent ; that the Greek mercenary 
was usually l oyal to his oath ; and that he commanded the 
services of a few men of capacity and experience, such as 
Hieronymos, and Phila's son Krateros, his own half-brother. 
j^; No policy worth the name, beyond attempting to keep his 
/Greek possessions together, can have commended itself to 
^^Xjiim. It is true that he still held everything in Greece that 
Demetrios had held, except Athens ; in his hands were the 
great fortresses of Demetrias, Chalkis, Piraeus, and Corinth, 
while doubtless Corinth brought him in a certain amount of 
revenue from duties on its trade and harbour dues. But 
elsewhere there must have been already beginning that change 
in Greek temper which was to show itself openly five years 
later. Boeotia was of course entirely uncertain, and so were 
many of the smaller cities ; and if Argos and Megalopolis 
were of necessity lo3'al to the northern power, as against 
Sparta, it did not follow that they considered Antigonos, 
rather than (say) Pyrrhos, as the prince who could claim their 
loyalty. In ^addition to this he was definitely, if not very 
energetically, at war with Athens, with the initial disadvan- 
tage of possessing no fleet till some time later in the year, 
when the loyal ships returned to him from Kaunos.^ And 
his kingdom, such even a,s it was, without Athens was 
merely a kingdom of disjected fragments. All that it seemed 
I in his power to do was to wait and to hope for one of those 
turns of Fortune's wheel of which he had already had such 
plentiful experience. His intimate friends knew that he 
looked on the kingship of Macedonia as his ; and his conduct 
on a later occasion seems to show that he had little doubt 
of his ultimate destiny.'' 

^ That they did return is shown by his possession of a fleet in 283. 

'"' Menedemos spoke of his acquisition of the crown of Macedonia as of the 
return of an exile to his own country (ch. 6, n. 104) ; and when Antigonos 
was driven out by Pyrrhos he still wore the purple. 




Thi s was the position in 285 wh en Pyrrhos, the co rTSJatPnt- 
enemy o f Antigonos' house, w ho had attacked and broken 
Taith with that house on every opportunity, and who had 
just deprived Antigonos of nearly the whole of Thessaly, 
veered round and made overtures to Antigonos for an alli- 
ance. The attraction to Pyrrhos was the army of me rce- 
naries, many of them doubtless veterans, and a fleet in being 
which might act as a make-weight against that of Lysi- 

Antigonos was really between the hammer and the anvil. 
He was unpopular in Greece on account of the taxation, and i/ 
the world probably regarded him as untried : and he was nojjl 
match, in strength, for Pyrrhos, who had just been threaten- 
ing his Greek possessions. On the other hand, Athens , was 
to him the point of greatest importance ; he was at war with 
her, and the nationalist government were on very good terms 
with Lysimachos. It might suit Lysimachos, at any moment, 
to interfere in the affairs of Greece, and avenge himself on 
the son of his ancient enemy ; and in Athens he had a pretext 
ready to hand. And as between Pyrrhos and Lysimachos, 
Antigonos can have had no doubt as to which would prove 
the more dangerous antagonist ; indeed he seems to have 
felt a natural contempt for Pyrrhos and his methods.^ It was 
inevitable, therefore, (no accommodation with Lysimachos k\ 
being possible), that when Pyrrhos proposed to him a bargain 
of mutual insurance against Lysimachos he should accept ; 
and probably his first act as an independent ruler was the 
negotiation with Pyrrhos of the famous 'secret treaty'. It 
owed both its origin and its secrecy to a common fear of 
"Lysimachos. Naturally wc are no better informed of its 
contents than were contemporaries. It may have been 
essentially a treaty of defence against Lysimachos on the 
basis of the sfatus quo, each party respecting the possessions 

'' This comes out in several stories; the best is that in Plut. Pyrrh. 8, 
where Antigonos says that Pyrrhos would be the best of generals if he should 
ever grow out of childhood, av yrjjnicrr]. The fact that the saying is obviously 
modelled on Plato, 7'i//i. 22 B, where an Egyptian priest is supposed to say 
to Solon, "KXXr/^ey du Traibei fcrre, ytpatv bi "¥,\\rjv qvk eaTiv, is in favour of, 
rather than against, its authenticity ; for Antigonos, who was always quoting, 
was at least as likely to allude to the Tiinaios as some Alexandrian man of 

I 2 


of the other ; jDutjtJis_ob.YiQJLia .froraJhe-CDurae of eventsjhat 

: it bound Antigonos to aid Pyrrhos if attacked, and that it 

\ gave Antigonos a free hand as regarded Athens. Pyrrhos, 

'« 'of~€ovnsc, was more or less in a position to insert his own 

I lerms.^ 

The need of the treaty, from Pyrrhos' point of view, was 

quickly enough seen. Once the immediate fear of Demetrios 

was removed, Lysimachos, who had but recently prevailed 

on Pyrrhos to break his treaty with Demetrios, showed no 

hesitation in tearing up his own treaty with Pyrrhos and in 

invading Pyrrhos' half of Macedonia. Antigonos sent troops 

to support Pyrrhos, according to the treaty; and Pyrrhos 

and his allies took up a strong position near Edessa, the old 

capital, perhaps too strong to be openly attacked. An3^how, 

Lysimachos did not attack him ; but he reduced him to such 

straits, on the one hand by cutting off his supplies, and on 

the other b}^ tampering with all the leading men of his part}^, 

that Pyrrhos abandoned the contest, and went home with 

his Epeirots and Antigonos' mercenaries, having lost Mace- 

'\ donia as quickly as he had won it." That country, which 

\ had recently conquered half the world, was now being tossed 

»i from one prince to another at the careless arbitrament of the 

; sword ; the fate of Alexander's kingdom seemed as unhappy 

I as had been the fate of Alexander's son. 

The immediate effect of this change, which took place in 
the campaigning season of 285, was to make L3''simachos in 
his turn much the strongest of the kings. His power was 
now very great. He held Macedonia and most of Thessaly ; 
parts of Thrace, and its coasts as far north as the Danube ; 
and a large part of Asia Minor, including practically all the 

* The secret treaty, /; a-Kona^iivr) o/xoXoy/a, is known only from a fragment 
of Phoinikides' Av\>]Tpi8is (Keck 3, 333). I know of no warrant for Fer- 
guson's supposition that by it Antigonos ceded the Cyclades to Egypt 
(/. //. S. 1910, p. 191, n. 12) ; the only parties to it are given as Antigonos 
and Pyrrhos. If Ptolemy be held to have become a party as being Pyrrhos' 
ally (Ferguson, Athens, 151, 160), so must Lysimachos; a reductio ad 
absurduiii.—\\. created a precedent ; in 220/19 Sparta and Aetolia made 
a similar treaty, 6t' cinoppijroiv, Polyb. 4, 16. 

^ Plut. Pyrr/i. I2 (where Antigonos' troops are the o-r/i/xaxtKi? 6i'i'n/xis) ; 
Pans. I, 10, 2. — Klotzsch, p. 205, suggests that Pyrrhos had also Aetolian 
allies. If my view of Aetolian policy be correct, Aetolia cannot have joined 
him till later; see pp. in, 119. 


great coast cities from the Hellespont down to Seleukos' 
westernmost province of Kilikia. Only in the north of Asia 
Minor and on the Bosphoros did any independent states 
exist to vex him. Byzantion was free ; and Byzantion had 
always been friendly to the house of Antigonos. The half- 
barbarian Bithynians had successfully defied him; and in 
their little territory at the mouth of the Sangarios their 
tribesmen maintained a fierce independence. Further to the 
east, the beginnings of the kingdom of Pontes intervened 
between Lysimachos' territory and the Black Sea. But 
even here he had strengthened his position enormously by 
the acquisition, in 289, of the great maritime city of Herakleia, 
with its dependencies and its territory. Its territory lay 
along the Black Sea, a wedge thrust in between Bithynia 
and Pontos; and Herakleia gave Lysimachos free access to 
that sea. From his capital Lysimacheia, in the Thracian 
Chersonese, he kept guard over the Hellespont, watching 
the traders from the Euxine pay his tolls and help to fill his 
well-managed treasury ; and if Byzantion was still indepen- 
dent and wealthy, he had her in a vice of which the jaws 
were Lysimacheia and Herakleia. The strength of his 
empire, with its great number of Greek cities, must have 
been far superior to that of the loosely knit and unwieldy 
collection of kingdoms that formed the realm of Seleukos.^" 

It would seem too as if Lysimachos had ambitions in the 
Aegean. With the acquisition of Macedonia he may have 
looked on himself as Demetrios' heir ; and he grudged that j 
a slice of the inheritance should have fallen to Ptolemy 
without that astute monarch having had to strike a single 
blow. "'Lj^simachos had now a fair navy; Herakleia supplied 
him with an efficient nucleus; he had secured some portion 
of Demetrios' fleet, at any rate the ships at Pella if nothing- 
else ; and he could draw on a number of towns in Asia. 
While Demetrios was flying before Agathokles, L3'simachos' 
fleet had made haste to annex what it could in the Aegean ; 
and Lemnos, Imbros, and Samothrake had fallen into his 

"* Herakleia; Beloch 3, I, 241 and rofs. ; Bithynia, ib. 242.— Friendship 
of Byzantion for Anti^'onos 1 and Demetrios; Syll? 170, 171, 172 ; I.G. ii, 
251 = Michel 1475 ; Diod. 18, 72, 6; Polyaen. 4, 6, 8. 


hands." He already ruled on both sides of the North 
Aegean, and he may have looked forward to the day when 
he should oust Ptolemy from the Cyclades ; for he had 
already begun to turn his attention to Delos.^''^ 

The. effects of the campaign of 285 on Antigonos' position 

^ were speedily' apparent. In order to send a force to aid 
Pyrrhos, he had had to weaken his garrisons ; and Athens 
was not slow to profit by the opportunity for a fresh attempt 
on the Piraeus. As Antigonos stood with Pyrrhos, Athens 
took occasion, in September 285, to pass a decree in honour 
of Lysimachos' friend Philippides, and, by imphcation, of 
Lysimachos himself. The decree refers to Phihppides' con- 
tinuous requests to the king for aid to recover Piraeus and 
the forts as soon as possible. Whether Lysimachos spared 
any aid for Athens is not known ; but the city received the 
help of a force from the island of Tenos, help that can hardly 
have been given without the countenance of Ptolemy. This 
time the work was entrusted to the right hands, those of the 
veteran Ol3'mpiodoros ; and he crowned his many services 

/ to Athens by expelling Antigonos' garrison from Mounychia 
and recovering the Piraeus.'" 

It must, too, have been at the same time that another 
veteran, Xanthippos of Elateia, supported by the friendship 
and gold of Lysimachos, succeeded in expelling Antigonos' 

f garrison from his native city and freeing Phokis, or so much 
of it as was not Aetolian.^^ The coincidence in time with 
013'mpiodoros' recover}^ of the Piraeus is noteworthy, and 

" Lemnos ; Phylarchos ap. Athen. 6, 255 a ; cf. I. G. ii, 5, 318 c: Samo- 
thrake ; Syl/r 190. He can only have taken both on Demetrios' downfall. 

'2 SylL- 918. 

'^ The decree for Philippides {Sy//.^ 197) was passed in Boedromion of 
Euthios' year. The Athenian vote of thanks to Tenos {/. G. ii, 5,345 c, 
second half) was passed in Ourios' year. See generally, and on the dating, 
App. 2. — Olympiodoros' capture of Piraeus ; Paus. i, 26, 3. I see no reason 
to doubt this, in view of the epigraphic sources for Olympiodoros' exploits to 
which Pausanias refers. He also says it was a greater feat than the recovery 
of the Mouseion. If so, it could hardly be either in 307 or 295/4, as Ferguson 
suggests {Athens, 152, n. 4), which would mean that Olympiodoros took it 
in Demetrios' interest ; this would have been no great feat in 307, while in 
294 it was handed over by resolution and not taken at all (Plut. Dem. 34). 

" Inscription on Xanthippos' statue at Delphi ; Pomtow in B. Ph. IV. 
1 912, p. 507. I quite agree that the two 'tyrants' are Kassandros and 


no doubt points to concerted action. For sixteen years 
before, Xanthippos and Olympiodoros, acting in Demetrios' 
interest, had together saved Elateia from Kassandros ; ^^ and 
their joint action against Demetrios' son is but one instance 
the more — we have seen many such — of the manner in which 
Demetrio s' friends had had to change their attitude as soon 
as he sat on Kassandros' throne. As some make-weight to 
these losses, however, Aetolia, true to her consistent pohcy 
and alarmed by the recent exhibition of Lysimachos' strength, 
ceased to court the king of Macedonia ^and, formally or 
informally, joined Pyrrhos and Antigonos.^'^ 

The loss of Piraeus, joined to that of Athens, cut Antigonos' / 
realm, such as it was, in half; while the loss of Elateia left 
his Boeotian garrisons isolated. His position in the spring '^'\^ 
of 284 was certainly far from brilliant. He was committed "y 
to an alliance with the unstable Pyrrhos, which so far haajKC^ 
merely provoked Lysimachos to no purpose ; and the latter, / 
as the friend of Athens, might be expected to attack him in 
overwhelming force whenever it should please him to do so. 
Even at sea Lysimachos was probably more than his match.^'^ 
The expected attack, however, did not take place. L3'si- 
machos, with an old man's caution, decided first to make all 
safe in his rear, and spent the campaigning season of 284 in 
reducing Paionia. Audoleon was dead, and his son Ariston 
exiled, for what reason is unknown ; L3'Simachos brought 
the young man back to his kingdom, and he was duly in- 
stalled after undergoing the ' royal bath ' in the river Astibos. 
Perhaps he was not a sufficiently docile puppet ; anyhow 
Lysimachos turned him out again and annexed Paionia, 
while Ariston escaped to what became henceforth the common 
refuge of kings in misfortune, the Dardanian court. It is 
recorded that the treasure of the Paionian kings had been 
buried in the bed of a diverted river, the water then being 

" See ch. 4, n. 14, and in particular Pomtow's commentary in B.Pli. Jl'. 
1912, p. 507 seq., on the inscription mentioned in the last note. 

'^ The /tic^ is shown by Pyrrhos recruiting Aetolians for his ItaHan expe- 
dition, Dion. Hal. 20, i, and Aetolia being Gonatas' ally in 280, Just. 24, 
1,3. As to the (/a/e, it must follow Lysimachos' campaign of 285, whicli 
opened Aetolia's eyes, and precede Lysimachos' setting-up of an independent 
Akarnania, probably in 283 — a measure in part directed against Aetolia. 

''' Shown by his defeat by Lysimachos' fleet under Keraunos in 280. 



let back and all the workmen put to death ; Audoleon's 
trusted friend Xermodigestos betrayed the place to Lysi- 

Once sure of Paionia, Lysimachos, probably in the cam- 
paigning season of 283, followed up his attack upon Pyrrho s ; 
he must-bave tliought him more dangerous than Antigonos, 
and he was evidently working on a methodical plan. He 
took advantage of Pyrrhos' absence, perhaps in Illyria, to 
invade Epeiros. It does not appear that he recovered the 
border provinces of Parauaia and T3a'nphaia, for this could 
hardly have escaped mention; lig,^merely overran part of 
the country and perhaps secured his own frontier, while 
some of his Thracians brought discredit on him by plunder- 
ing the tombs of Pyrrhos' ancestors, a deed which Pyrrhos 
was one day to repay in kind.^'^ But L3'simachos had a 
[ definite purpose in his raid, and inflicted on both Pyrrhos 
I and Aetolia a severe blow ; for, following Kassandros' prece- 
dent, he freed Akarnania, and set it up again, with Leukas 
restored to it, as an independent state. Pyrrhos made no 
attempt to reconquer Akarnania while Lysimachos lived, and 
by 281 he had plans in view compared with which that 
country was of small importance ; it suited him better to be 
on good terms with her, so that he might recruit mercenaries 
for his Italian expedition in her territory .-° 

^* Ariston ; Polyaen. 4, 12, 3. The treasure; Diod. 21, 13. A similar 
. hiding-place was found for the plunder taken from Rome by Alaric. 

^^ Paus. I, 9, 8 (from Hieronymos). Pyrrhos got his revenge at Aigai (see 
ch. 9, p. 265). See generally Klotzsch, p. 212. 

^'^ Akarnania was ceded to Pyrrhos by Kassandros' son Alexander in 294. 
When Pyrrhos crossed to Italy in 281 he took Akarnanian mercenaries 
(Dion. Hal. 20, 1), and the only conclusion to be drawn, in my opinion, is 
that Akarnania was then independent. (Klotzsch, pp. 172-4, has argued for 
the contrary view, but in my opinion without success. See ch. 2, n. 53.) 
And if Akarnania was independent in 281, it must have been Lysimachos 
who freed her from Pyrrhos. In my view, the independence of Akarnania is 
amply confirmed by the treaty between Akarnania and Aetolia, of which the 
copy at Thermos has been published by Soteriades, 'Ecf). 'Apx- 1905, p. 55. 
(A fragment of the copy at Olympia has been identified by A. Wilhelm, 
'E^. 'Apx- 1910, 147.) Soteriades concluded that the date was circ. 273. 
It cannot be before 285, as Lysimacheia in Aetolia is mentioned; and 
Soteriades' observation, that if it were before 279 the Akarnanian troops 
must have appeared against the Celts, is valid. On the other hand, I cannot 
follow the view of H. Swoboda {J\/w, 1910, p. 397) that Akarnania never 
got free of Pyrrhos during his life, and therefore the treaty is later than 272. 
(Rejected also by A. J. Reinach, Jonrn. Intern. 191 1, p. 239.) He points out 



Xheoverwhelming nature of Lysimachos' power was now 
plain to every~6ne, wKile it couldriot be foreseen that domestic 
tragedy was to prevent the further realization of his am- 
bitions. But, so far, he had given no sign of what his inten- 
tions were with regard to Greece proper, or whether he had 
an}^ intentions at all ; and Antigonos, relieved of danger from 
the north-west, and bound to find employment for his mer- 
cenaries, was able to throw himself with more earnestness 
into his war with Athens. He had settled that the most 
important matter for himself was the recovery of Piraeus ; 
and perhaps already by the autumn of 284 he had brought 
his fleet up and formed the siege of that fortress.^^ 

that one of the Akarnanian strategoi (see 1. 22) comes from Leukas, which he 
says belonged to Pyrrhos all his life. But, even if Pyrrhos reconquered 
Leukas after Uemetrios' fall (see ch. 2, p. 48 1, Lysimachos probably freed it 
with and joined it to Akarnania, as would be natural. And the treaty ought 
to be placed as far as possible from the partition of Akarnania by Aetolia 
and Alexander of Epeiros ; a decent interval must have elapsed. Soteriades' 
date, though not free from difficulty, seems to me very near the mark ; only 
I would put it in 276/274, before Pyrrhos I'eturned (see ch. 7, p. 212) ; for 
I think tliat Aetolia made the treaty for her own advantage, and that it was 
not a case (as supposed by A. J. Reinach, Joiirn. Intern. 191 1, p. 236, and 
Klotzsch, p. 175) of Pyrrhos uniting his dependant, Akarnania, to his friend, 
Aetolia ; there seems no point in this, and Akarnania certainly contracts as 
an independent power. It is annoying to think that there is said to exist an 
unpublished treaty between Pyrrhos and Akarnania (Swoboda, /. f., p. 400, 
n. 2), which could hardly fail to throw light on the whole question. 

^^ With this war of Antigonos against Athens is connected the amazing 
statement of Eusebios under the year 285/4, ' Antigonus Gonatas Lacedae- 
monios tenuit' ; in Jerome it comes under Ol. 124, 2 = 283/2, ' Antigonus 
cognomento Gonatas Lacedaemonem obtinuit.' This obvious confusion with 
the capture of Sparta by .Antigonos Doson would not even deserve notice had 
not lieloch (3, 2, 304) argued that it was true, and Ferguson followed him 
{Athens, 152). I trust that my narrative has shown that the capture of 
Sparta by Gonatas at this time would have been an historical miracle ; he 
could not even take Eleusis ! Eusebios is full of similar blunders ; e. g. 
Schoene i, 237, 23S, a hopeless confusion of Demetrios the Fair and 
Demetrios II ; so 239 ; ib. 243, confusion of Pyrrhos with his son Alexander ; 
ib. 235 & 249, Ptolemy Keraunos is son of Lagos. See the similar confusion 
from Aristeas and Josephos given in note 43. — Beloch quotes in corrobora- 
tion Just. 24, I, 3 : ' omnes fcrme Graeciae civitates, ducibus Spartanis, . . . 
ne cum Antigono, sub cuius regno crant, bellum coepisse viderentur, socios 
eius Aetolos adgrediuntur. . . . Huic bello ducem deligunt Area,' &c. He 
takes, that is to say, the subject of e7ant to be Spartani (implied). Surely 
it is quite plain ; the subject of crant, as of deligunt, is ' omnes ferme Graeciae 
civitates'. It does not seem to bear on the question at all. — On the other 
hand, the tradition is quite clear that Doson was the first who took Sparta 
or who caused it to cease to be independent. Phylarchos, fr. 46 = Athen. 6, 
251 d, 'Aj/Ttyoj'ou ToD KXrjdfVTos 'ETTiTjumov tov Tois XaKf^nifioi/tovi e'Xdi'TOf, Just. 
28, 4, 14, ' a quo solo capta sit ' ; cf. 4, 2, ' pro inlibata libertatc' Paus. 


In the spring of 283 Demetrios' long imprisonment drew 
to its close. Seleukos, who had realized that the threat of 
his liberation might be a very useful weapon to employ, if 
necessary/against Lysimachos, had held out to his captive 
a prospect of release when Antiochos and Stratonike should 
come from the eastern satrapies ; his freedom should be 
a gift to his daughter and his daughter's husband. But 
Antiochos had tarried, perhaps on purpose ; and at the end 
of two years the most brilliant figure of the age, unable to 
support enforced idleness and hope deferred, had drunk him- 
self to death in his captivity. His stormy life had shaken the 
W ; world ; but he left nothing behind him save some improve- 
S*,^ «^ments in siege-trains and shipbuilding, and a son. 

The world had already discounted his death ; and the only 
person affected was Antigonos. Seleukos sent back the 
remains, and Antigonos, letting the siege be, put to sea with 
his whole fleet and met the funeral-ship in mid-Aegean. 
There he received the casket containing the ashes of the 
great sea-king, and turned his prows homeward. Plutarch 
has left a picture of the fleet entering the harbour of Corinth ; 
the mourners swollen by contingents from every city they 
had passed; the golden casket set high on the flagship's 
poop, covered with Demetrios' purple robe and crowned 
with his diadem ; the huge oars of the warships beating time 
to the sacred melody of the flute-pla3^er Xenophantos ; the 
wailing crowds answering from the shore ; and Antigonos, 
plain to see, standing by the ashes with bowed head and 
streaming eyes. From Corinth the fleet sailed to Demetrias ; 
there they buried Demetrios, in the city which he had founded 
to bear his name.'-^- 

The death o f Demetrios heralded the passing of the 
generation that had known Alexander. That winter died 

I, 13, 6, Sparta had seen three invaders before Pyrrhos, viz. Epameinondas, 
Antipatros, Demetrios; Pyrrhos was the fourth. — See Addenda. 

'^'^ Plut. Dem. 52, 53.— I do not think that Seleukos sent back the ashes 
till the year after, 282, when he desired Antigonos' goodwill in view of his 
coming conflict with Lysimachos. Also Xenophantos the Theban was at 
Delos in 282 (Kleostratos' year), when he took part in the Apollonia 
(HomoUe, Archives, 69, = /. G. xi, 106, 1. l6j. A crown oftered by him 
appears in 279, Hypsokles B, 1. 89. 



Ptolemy I in Egypt, having seen his son firmly seated on 
the throne. It was perhaps the just reward of his prudence 
"and foresight that he, in contradistinction to the majority of 
the Successors, died quietly in his bed. Only two men of 
the age of giants now remained ; would they perhaps, after 
all, die quietly also? Fate was to fall otherwise. 

Lysimachos in advanced j^ears had married a young girl, J^ 
Arsinoe, eldest daughter of Ptolemy I and Berenike, and 
full sister of Ptolemy II, who wa s to be the most extra- 
ordinary woman of her time ; and iDemetrios had once 
declared that she was not exactly the old man's Penelope. 
But on any matter connected with Lysimachos a statement 
made b}'' Demetrios is as valueless as may be ; and though 
scandal was busy enough with Arsinoe's name, the story it 
had to tell — that she made advances to her step-son Aga- 
thokles, which were repulsed — is ever}' bit as worthless as 
most of the other court gossip of antiquity. The flaw in 
Arsinoe was not perhaps immorality but ambition, an over- 
'"mastering ambition to which she was ready to sacrifice most 
things ; and it is not necessary to suppose her a bad woman 
merely because she became a great ruler. Even her ambition 
was as much for her children as for herself; she had in fact 
something very like a fixed idea, to get the crown of Mace- ^, 
donia for her eldest son Ptolemaios. The numerous coin--^ 
portraits that remain of her, man}' of them struck some time 
after her death, give her handsome features, sometimes with 
prominent eyes ; but there is one, differing slightly from the 
usual type though resembling it in the general lines, which 
we would gladly believe to be her true likeness. It shows 
a finely chiselled face of purest Greek type, pensive, remote, 
and austere, the nun-like effect only enhanced by the usual 
long, heavy veil : nothing can be less like the Arsinoe of 
tradition, and no lovelier face has come down to us from the 
Greek world. No doubt it is idealized ; but it may serve to 
remind u s that Arsinoe was not only a political intriguer, but 
the clos e friend of tTic de\uut and religious Stratonik c.'" - 

^ On this and tlic subsequent events at Lysimachos" court, Meninon 8 
(/". //.C iii, 532); Trog. /VtV. 17; Paus. i, 10, 3-4; Just. 17, i; Strabo 
13, 623 ; Euseb. I, 233, 234 (Schoene). — Demetrios' remark, I'lut. De;/i. 25. 


What really took place at Lysimachos' court is unknown. 
Perhaps it never was known. The court had always been 
a refuge for other states' exiles, who had their uses ; and at 
this time it sheltered an important fugitive, Ptolemy eldest 
son of Ptolemy I and Eur3'dike, disinherited by his father 
in favour of Berenike's son, but for all that lawful claimant 
to the crown of Egypt. When first exiled he had gone to 
Seleukos, who had promised to seat him on the throne of 
Egypt when his father died ; but his father was dead and 
Seleukos had done nothing, so he had left Seleukos and gone 
to Lysimachos.^* This violent and unscrupulous man was 
one storm-centre ; Arsinoe may have been another. There 
was intrigue and counter-intrigue ; we seem to see Arsinoe 
and Agathokles' wife Lysandra working against each other, 
each for her own children ; while Ptolemy probably acted 
on the view that any form of trouble could hardly fail to 
advantage himself, and it is quite uncertain if he sided with 
his sister or his half-sister, or with either. But it was clear 
that there was no opening for him so long as Agathokles 
lived. Here we lose the thread entirely, and only emerge 
at length upon a fact, that Lysimachos had Agathokles put 
to death for supposed treason. It was whispered that Ptolemy 
had executed the sentence with his own hand ; but however 
that ma}^ be, the popular voice threw the blame on Arsinoe.-'"' 

— Arsinoe's friendship for Stratonike, O. G. I. 14 (the date is not before 293 ; 
see ch. 12, p. 349). — J. N. Svoronos, rli voyLiafiaTti tov Kparovs tcov Ilro Ac 
fj-nlav, iv, 86, is very emphatic on Arsinoe's beauty. He selects in particular 
the portrait on a coin struck in Cyprus, PI. 15, i. (See on Arsinoe's portraits 
in general, on the Ptolemaic gold coinage, Svoronos mjoiirji. Intern. 2, 
p. 183.) But the portrait to which I refer in the text is to my mind much 
more beautiful. The coin is a tetradrachm, with rev. eagle on thunderbolt, 
and legend \\{>(nv6i]^ ^CKaW\(\>ov ; B. M. Coins, Ptolemies, PI. viii, no. 3 ; 
Svoronos, vo\x. UioK. ii, p. 66, no. 410 (PI. 16, no. 13). The plate in Svoronos, 
however, gives no idea of the face ; that in B. M. Coins is absolutely correct, 
as I ascertained by comparison with the original. The five known tetra- 
drachms of this series are dated by Svoronos (i, p. pvQ\ Synopsis no. 5) to the 
years 271-265 ; if so, the portrait was cut during Arsinoe's lifetime. These 
dates, it is true, are far from certain ; see, however, Head'-', p. 847, who 
concludes that Svoronos' arrangement has 'established a claim to at least 
provisional acceptance'. 

^^ It is clear, from the dates, that Seleukos' promise to Ptolemy was made 
long before Kouroupedion. This is supported by Porphyry (Euseb. I, 235, 
Schoene ; Syncell. in F. H. G. iii, p. 696), who says that Seleukos received 
him fK (Pvyrjs. Hence he was twice at Seleukos' court. 

^^ The truth about Agathokles' death is hopelessly lost. But we must 


Lysimachos' power leant and tottered forthwith. An earth- 
quake that shook his capital shortly' before Agathokles' 
death had terrified the superstitious of his subjects; they 
had now better cause for alarm in the execution of all who 
were suspected of sympathizing with the dead prince. Those 
who could escape fled to Seleukos and sought his inter\^en- 
tion ; among them was Lysandra with her children. But 
Ptolemy stayed with Lysimachos ; it is probable, from what 
happened later, that he held a command in the arm}^, and 
was seeking to make himself indispensable, perhaps to the 
old king, deserted by so many of his friends, certainly to 
the troops."*'' 

While L3'simachos' action abroad was thus pai-al3'sed by 
domestic troubles, Antigonos had been besieging the Piraeus.-"^ 
It seems certain that the Long Walls were already, if not in 
ruins, at any rate useless for military purposes, and that 
Athens and Piraeus were already two separate fortresses, 
though it cannot be said exactly when this first took place.-^ 
Athens had taken into her service the mercenaries under 
Strombichos,-^ and she evidentl}^ made a good fight ; and 
Antigonos does not seem to have had force enough both to 
carry on the siege and to capture the outlying Attic forts, 

follow Memnon-Nymphis where possible. Nymphis was alive at the time, 
and belonged, though an exile, to a city afterwards friendly to Keraunos 
(Memn. 1 1) ; and I cannot discard his plain statement (I\lemn. 8) (as Beloch 
does, 3, I, 228, n. i) that Keraunos was the murderer, though I should like 
to. Justin and Pausanias are worth little here; Pausanias says, very 
honestly, that his version is mere gossip. — Klotzsch's theory (p. 203, n. 2) of 
a joint plot of Keraunos and Agathokles seems to conflict with Memnon. 

^^ It is obvious from Memnon 12 (after Kouroupedion Keraunos in avrov 
(Seleukos) eriXti, olx ^i fii^/idXorof napopoo^fvns ktX.) that Keraunos teas 
Seleukos' prisoner, that is, that he stayed with Lysimachos to the end ; as is 
required, too, to explain his acceptance later by Lysimachos' old army. He 
was presumably Lysimachos' right hand after Agathokles' death, holding 
high command. This is not the version found in modern histories ; but 
Thirlwall (8, 48) rightly saw that he accompanied Lysimachos to the end. 

" As Antigonos held Piraeus in 279 (ch.6, n. 50), and always subsequently, 
his operations for its recovery must Jiave formed the central point of the war. 

^* The only definite data appear to be. that the Long Walls were repaired 
in 307 seq., when the fortifications of Athens were remodelled, and were in 
ruins in 229 ; for the evidence see I-'erguson, Athens, pp. 113, 211. But the 
story demands that, anyhow from 2S8 onward, Piraeus was a separate fortress 
from Athens, and the Long Walls useless for military purposes. 

" /. G. ii, 317 & 31S = Syll? 198 & 199 = Michel 127 & 1481, thanks to 
Strombichos for past services and help in the present war, passed Jan. 281 ; 
two copies. 



for in 283/2 Eleusis was still in Athenian hands.^'' It was 
probably in 282 that Antigonos put to sea to bring home 
Demetrios' ashes ; "^ and it is possible that this was the 
occasion on which he made the truce with Athens to which 
we have reference made, supposing the story to be true.^^ 
Certainly war was going on during some part of the year 
283/2 ; ^^ and in February 282 sacrifice was offered in the 
Little Mysteries at Eleusis for the safety of the people of 
Athens and their friends. ^^ How the truce ended we do not 
i know; but hunger ended the war. Antigonos at some time 
(during the struggle captured Piraeus, garrisoned Mounychia,_^ 
jand gave his mind to starving out the cit}^ ; to his commander 
iri"*Mounychia, who had been strengthening its defences, he 
vvTOte that he must not only make the dog-collar strong, but 
/ the dog lean.'^^ Military operations had laid waste the country, 
A while Antigonos' fleet and the loss of Piraeus prevented the 
entry of corn. The Athenians might offer sacrifice for their 
friends ; but none of their friends were going to help them. 
Lysimachos' hands were tied; Pyrrhos was Antigonos' ally; 
Ptolemy II was not fond of war, and was too intent on what 
would happen in the north to move. Seleukos was making 
what friends he could in view of the now inevitable struggle 
with Lj^simachos, and had earned Antigonos' gratitude by 
sending back Demetrios' ashes; Antigonos was a natural 

^° I. G. ii, 5, 614 c = Syll? 505 = Michel 1522 ; Menekles' year. 

^' See note 22. 

^- Polyaen. 4, 6, 20, whatever the story means. It is generally placed in 
the Chremonidean war, which I find incredible ; for one thing, that was 
a war to the death, while this war was not, and this war contains a natural 
place and occasion for a truce. But I cannot think that the story, just as 
Polyaenos gives it, is very probable. 

^^ /. G. ii, 316 = SylL- 520, praise of the ephebes of 2S3/2 who had garri- 
soned the Mouseion, passed Sept. 282. 

^* /. G. ii, 315 = Syll? 649. — Ferguson, y^/Z/dV/j-, p. 154, ends the war before 
this, and adds : ' so that Soteria could be sacrificed at Eleusis in Feb. 282.' 
The decree has the usual reference to sacrifice offered in the Little Mysteries 
by the emufXrjrai of the mysteries e(f) lyuiai Kai cra)r[r]pi]ai rrjs j3ov\fjS Ka\ tov 
BTjfMov ; and then continues : ' and whereas the eVi/ieXjjrai of the mysteries did 
so and so in the Great Mysteries, Ka\ vw redvunaiv ra (Ta)[Tr]p]ia [Ta]'is 6(a[l]s 
vnep rrjs /3oi;X^y Kai tov Srjpov ' ; that is to say, the ' Soteria ' refer to the sacri- 
fice eVi <7(0TT]pig, and are here not a thanksgivitig but a prayer. It is a strange 
use, but I do not see that an analysis of the language offers any alternative. 

^^ Plut. Mor. 754b. — It must belong here; Antigonos would not have 
been recently fortifying (a);(;iipa>/ieVa)J Mounychia in the middle of the Chre- 
monidean war. 


enemy of Lysimachos in any case, and the civility cost 
nothing but the price of a casket. Athens decided to make ^ 
peace while terms could still be had ; and peace was made 
some time in 282/1, probably in early spring. At the Great 
Dionysia, celebrated in March, sacrifice was offered for the 
safety of the crops in the field, an event unique in Athenian 
history and eloquent of the straits to which hunger must 
have reduced the city.^'' 

But if Athens was exhausted by hunger, Antigonos, too, 
greatly desired to be quit of the war. Though some months/ / 
yet were to pass before the decision of Lysimachos' fate / 
should fall at Kouroupedion, it must have been evident already'; 
to shrewd observers that things were not well with him ; i 
and Antigonos, with his eyes always set upon Macedonia, * 
must have desired a free hand for eventualities. For what- i; 
ever might happen in the north, he had to conserve his 
strength ; if L3simachos pulled through, he would have^ 
a day of reckoning to face ; and if Lysimachos fell, thece 
might be chances in Macedonia. Hence the terms of peace 
seem to have been favourable for Athens. The nationalist 
government was of course removed, and was replaced by 
one composed of the friends of Macedonia, among them the 
now veteran Phaidros : and Athens had to acquiesce in the 
accomplished fact, the lo ss of Pir^ (;-ii.s^ But no other changes 
were made; we do not even know if Athens became subject/^ 
to Antigonos' suzerainty or not. 

^^ I think Ferguson (Athens, 154) has ended this war a year too soon. 
The crucial fact is that in 282/1, year of Nikias Otryneus, both Glaukon 
and Phaidros were nyasvo&irai (SyllP- 200, 213); and Ferguson (see Klio, 8, 
p. 345 seq.) has not noticed that the two men could not possibly have served 
in the same government. It does not much matter, on this point, whether 
Ferguson is right in saying there were two dyoji/o^eVat each year at this time 
or Sundwall in saying there was only one ; [I myself agree with Sundvvall ; 
how can one explain away, e.g. /. G. ii, 302, to\v^ aycoi/[(i]s: tois ^folv [fVtXfo-fi', 
by saying it was only some agones to sojne gods ?] ; the point is that Glaukon 
the nationalist could not be a colleague of Phaidros the pro-Macedonian. 
Consequently there was a change of government from nationalist to pro- 
Macedonian in 282/1, i.e. the war ended. Obviously the decree for 
Strombichos, Jan. 281, was passed while the nationalists were still in power. 
I incline to think that the unique prayer for a good harvest, /. G. ii, 5, 318 b 
= Sy/l? 6'i6, was offered a/fer peace ; if so, the war ended about Feb. 281. — 
Ferguson's view, that what Phaidros celebrated with display was the Great 
Panathenaia of July 282, depends on his view of the ay^voBfaia. If we agree 
with Sundwall, I should suppose it was the Great Dionysia of March 281. 



Lysimachos fell. His adherents went over to Seleukos 
in masses, tiH at fast, about July or August 281^ the two old 
men — Lysimachos was eighty and Seleukos seventy-seven — 
met on the plain of Kouros in Lydia in the last of the great 
battles between the Successors. •''' All details are lost; we 
know onl}^ that Lysimachos died hard, as he had lived, and 

I that, almost unsought, the whole of Alexander's empire, save 
Eg3'pt, suddenly lay at Seleukos' feet. 
Seleukos spent the autumn in gathering up the broken 
fragments of L3'simachos' realm in Asia. Arsinoe with some 
difficulty escaped to Ephesos, and with her sons reached 
Kassandreia, a cit}- where Lysimachos had been worshipped 
and where the feeling in his favour may have been strong ; 
she may have attempted to take possession of Macedonia for 
her son. Ptolemy, who may or may not have been in the 
battle, came into Seleukos' hands, but was well received by 
him and treated, not as a captive, but as a prince and an 
honoured guest. Seleukos saw that the rightful claimant 
to the only Macedonian throne still independent might be 
a very useful piece in the game. Meanwhile the crash of 
I Lysimachos' ruin carried far; and even among unknown 
'Celtic clans beyond the Danube word went round that the 
j.great barrier to a further advance southward was broken. 
For Antigonos, Seleukos' success had been' too complete. 

^^ Trog. Prol. 17 ; Just. 17, I, 9 ; Paus. i. 10, 5 ; Memnon 8 ; Appian Syr. 
62, 64; Eusebios (Schoene) i, 233 ; epitaph of a Bithynian, Alenas, who fell 
there, B.C.H. 1900, p. 380, R.Ph. 26, 1902, p. 257; Beloch 3, 2, 384.— The 
spelling varies ; the epitaph gives Koi'pou. — Date : several dates are here 
interdependent. Beloch made Kouroupedion July- August 281, and Keraunos' 
death spring 279. G. de Sanctis, Sforia del Romani, 1907, vol. ii, p. 390, 
n. 2, says July-August 282, and July-August 2S0, respectively, and is followed 
by Ferguson, Ai/iens, p. 154 seq. ; while Klotzsch, p. 208, comes to the same 
conclusion simply from a consideration of Eusebios' dates. I cannot follow 
de Sanctis, though it would make some points easier. The following is 
common ground to both him and Beloch (3, 2, 67-70) : — 01. 124, 4 = 281/0, 
Pyrrhos crosses; 01. 125. i = 280/79, VnkaToiv e(poSns (Polyb. I, 6, 5) ; Ol. 
125. 2 = 279/8, Gauls destroyed at Delphi. Both, too, put Keraunos' death 
in 01. 125. I, i.e. outside 01. 124 ; therefore the nepi of Polyb. 2, 41 does not 
favour one more than the other. What decides me is this : Plutarch (Pyrr/i. 
22) says Pyrrhos first heard of Keraunos' death after Asculum, i.e. definitely 
later than May 279 ; I find this quite incredible if Keraunos died August 280, 
for the matter was vital to Pyrrhos to know. (I think this has not been noticed.) 
I also feel a difficulty, if the Gauls killed Keraunos in summer 280, in making 
them waste so much of the good campaigning season of 279 as to get caught 
by the snow at Delphi. I therefore follow Beloch. 


He was at the moment on good terms with him and bound 
to him in gratitude ; and he could not forthwith invade a 
country that de hire belonged to Seleukos. He could still 
do nothing but watch events in the north ; and they looked 
so hopeless that he even turned over some of his transports 
to Pyrrhos for his expedition to Italy.'^^ 

Events in the north, however, moved quickly enough. On 
the old Seleukos, master of half the world, had fallen the 
home-longing ; he would end his days as king of Macedonia, 
on the throne of Alexander ; and in the winter of 281/0 he 
was preparing to enter upon his kingdom with an irresistible 
force. But he reckoned without Ptolemy. Ptolem}^ saw that 
with Seleukos' decision to occupy Macedonia his chance of 
getting anything out of the wreck of Lysimachos' fortunes, 
whether on his own account or as regent for Lysandra's son, 
the rightful heir, was at an end ; while as for his claim to the 
crown of Egypt, Seleukos might covet Egypt also — had he 
not once worn Alexander's diadem ? — and seek to use him as 
a puppet. He decided to strike quickly; he must for some 
time have been preparing his ground with the army. He 
waited till Seleukos, in defiance of the advice of Apollo of 
Didyma, had crossed the Hellespont and was at the gates of 
L3'simacheia. There Ptolemy slew him with his own hand, 
and escaped on a swift horse into the city. The city revered 
the memory of its founder ; Lysimachos' veterans welcomed 
one who posed as Lysimachos' avenger ; on all lay the 
glamour of the name of the murderer's father, the wise and 
just king of Eg3'-pt. Seleukos' forces, on the contrary, were. ^^.^ 
left without a head; his son Antiochos was far off; and| j/ 
Lysimachos' old army, captivated by Ptolem3''s fiery, energy', | 
and address, hailed him king of the Macedonians by the V 
name of Keraunos, t he Thunderbolt, and prepared to bring 
him to his kingdom.'^^ 

'" Just. 17, 2, 13. 

^'' Memn. 12 ; Trog. Prol. 17 ; Just. 17, 2 ; App. Syr. 62 ; Euseb. (Schoene) 
I, 235, 236. On Seleukos' title to Macedonia, see "C. F. Lehmann-Haupt, 
Klio, 5, 244 ; 7, 449 ; 9, 248, who argues that he was king dc iure by choice of 
the army ; contra, F. Reuss, R/ieifi. Mns. 62, 595 ; K/io, 9, 76, he had nothing 
but the conqueror's right to take possession if he could. The evidence is 
defective. — On Keraunos' motives, Lehmann-Haupt, Klio, 5, 253, who thinks 

H76 K 


His kingdom did not seem likely to be a bed of roses, for 
rival claimants were numerous and powerful. Antiochos was 
bound to attack him, both to assert his own pretensions and 
to avenge his father. Antigonos would probably attack him, 
in prosecution of his own hereditary rights. Pyrrhos, as ex- 
king, had man}^ friends in the western provinces, and might 
be expected to fight. Lysandra must use all her influence 
for her own children ; and her influence cannot have been 
negligible, for Agathokles had been popular, and had had 
many partisans. The last surviving member of Kassandros' 
house, his nephew Antipatros, had a following in some part 
of Macedonia. Finally, there was Arsinoe, for the last seven 
months firmly estabhshed with her mercenaries in Kassan- 
dreia, and possibly actually governing as much of the country 
as she could in the name of her eldest son by Lysimachos, 
Ptolemaios, now about sixteen years of age."^*^ 

How Keraunos dealt with Lysandra and her children we 
do not know, but may perhaps guess ; they vanish from 
history. Pyrrhos was fully engaged at the moment with his 
preparations for crossing to Italy. But Antiochos and Anti- 
gonos at once made ready for war ; whether independently 
or in conjunction does not appear. 

Of Antiochos Keraunos probably took little heed. The 
new king of Asia had troubles enough of his own ; for revolts 
had broken out in his unwieldy kingdom on the news of 
Seleukos' death, and a ring of enemies cut him off from 
crossing to Europe, even had he so desired. Zipoites of 
Bithynia was the most important of them. His people had, 
naturally, aided Seleukos against their enemy Lysimachos ; 
but, with Seleukos in Lysimachos' place, they had been 
quick to perceive the fresh danger that threatened their in- 
dependence, and now prepared to resist the new ruler of 
Asia Minor as they had resisted the old. The powerful city 
of Herakleia had recovered her freedom after Kouroupedion, 
and had no intention of surrendering it again to the Seleukid ; 

he aimed at being Regent. — Lysimachos must have been popular with his 
army, Diod. 21, 12, I. 

^° Just. 17, 2 has a Hst of pretenders, but incomplete. — Trog. Prol. 24 says 
that Ptolemy ' Arsinoen imperio Macedonicarum urbium exuit', which looks 
fis if she was ruling de facto much more than Kassandreia. 


she entered into a league with Byzantion and Chalkedon for 
the maintenance of their independence, and they were joined 
by the Persian prince Mithridates of Pontos, who, like the 
B3'zantines, had been a friend of Demetrios. Seleukos had 
sent an army against him, which had been cut to pieces by 
Mithridates' Kappadokians ; and the victorious coalition 
was now making head against Antiochos. Probably they 
were well disposed towards Keraunos; anyhow Herakleia 
placed her excellent fleet at his disposal.*' 

Antigonos, however, who had been watcliing events, was , 
unencumbered and ready. Shipping his men on transports,"\p 
tie set sa il with his whole fleet for Macedonia in the early . ' 
spring of 280, hoping to anticipate Keraunos. But Keraunos jV 
was as quick as he ; he intercepted him at sea with Lysi- 
machos' old navy, and in a great battle completely defeated 
him, a result which the patriotic historian of Herakleia attri- , 
butes in chief to the bravery of the ships of his own city : the | 
Herakleot flagship, a monstrous vessel mounting L3'simachos' 
badge, the image of a lion, carried off the palm for valour in ^ 
the action. It began to look as if the practical world had no^-^Of 
use for philosophers in high places."^^ 

SlO men thought in Greece. Antigonos' prestige, n ever 
high, was shattered by this the first defeat ever sustaine d bv 
Demetrios' navy ; even our all but vanished tradition still 
echoes the disaster, and shows the impression which it made.*^ 

^' Bithynian aid to Seleukos, see Menas' epitaph (note 37). Seleukos' 
defeat, Trog. Prol. 17. The coalition, Memnon 11. 

" Memnon 13 ; Just. 24, i, 8. Justin (17, 2, 10 and 24, i, i) may or may not 
mean that .Antiochos and Antigonos made common cause. — The lion, or head 
of a lion, frequently occurs on Lysimachos' coins, no doubt with reference to 
the story in Plutarch, Devi. 27. — See Addenda. 

" Memnon 14 refers to Gonatas as 'the man who was beaten at sea', [6] 
r,TT>}6e'is Tco vavTiKw. — This battle turns up again in a very curious place. 
Aristeas (ed. Wendland), p. 180, and Josephos, AvL hid. 12, 93, mention 
a great victory of Ptolemy Philadelphos over Antigonos, the anniversary of 
which was always celebrated at Alexandria. Niese apparently took this 
literally (ii, p. 130, n. 6); Beloch thought it a perverted echo of Kos (3, 2, 
431, n. i). The story, however, refers to the very beginning of Philadelphos" 
reign, for (i) Menedemos is supposed to be at Alexandria (.Arist. 201 ; Jos. 12, 
loi), and he died soon after 273 ; (2) there is reference to queen .Arsinoe and 
her children (Arist. 185 ; Jos. 12, 51), therefore Arsinoe I, who was divorced 
before 274, is still queen ; (3) in Josephos, Demetrios of Phaleron is still 
librarian, whereas Philadelphos banished him as soon as he had the power. 
There is no doubt therefore that the battle of Josephos and Aristeas is a 

K 2 


Discontent in Greece must, too, have reached breaking point 

iC with the new exactions that Antigonos must have found 

. necessaiy to equip his expedition ; and on the news of his 

I defeat Greece rose. LSgarta, pursuing her consistent polic}''," 

seized the opportunit}' to put herself once more at the head 

of a Peloponnesian league ; and even Argos and Megalopolis, 

whose policy and whose necessities made it impossible for 

V them to join with Sparta, expelled Antigonos* garrisons and 

\\ proclaimed freedom and neutrality ; Antigonos was not the 

only friend to be found in the North. Boeotia and Megara 

joined in the revolt. But for Corinth, Antigonos mjghtjiaye 

been swept out of the country.^* 

Corinth saved him from irremediable disaster. It cut the 
revolution in two ; Sparta and Boeotia could not join hands. 
With the remains of his fleet, Antigonos had hurried straight 
to Boeotia on the news that it had risen ; *^ but he was no 
longer a match even for Boeotia single-handed. Of the course 
of events we know nothing, save that in that year Boeotia 
regained her independence ; Megara in her wake did the 
same ; so no doubt did Eastern Lokris, unless it had 
alread}^ become free in 285. But Antigonos saved Euboea 
and Piraeus from the general wreck, and with them main- 
tained his communications between Corinth and Demetrias ; 
had the Peloponnesian arm}^ been able to move northward. 
The result might have been very different. 
-—'The Peloponnesians had chosen the Spartan king^^^Ejeus 
to lead the arm}' of the new league. Beside Sparta, tlTe 
members probably included most of Arkadia save Megalopolis, 

garbled recollection of Keraunos' victory, and one more proof of the hope-* 
lessness of incidental allusions in late writers on other subjects. 

" Just. 24, I. To take Justin literally, Greece rose ^«r/«_^ Antigonos' war 
with Keraunos, i.e. instantly on the news of his defeat. — The successful revolt 
of Boeotia and Megara is to be deduced from the fact that they were free in 
279. — Megalopolis seems to be independent in 279 ; she sent no troops against 
the Gauls because Sparta would not undertake not to attack her territory, 
Paus. 8, 6, 3 (where Megalopolis must primarily be meant) ; therefore Anti- 
gonos was no longer defending the city, which was still free in 273, Plut. 
Fjrr/i. 26. One must suppose that Megalopolis expelled Antigonos' garrison 
in 280. — Argos is free in 273, Plut. Pyri-Ji. 31, and therefore probably expelled 
her garrison in 280; but it may have been a little later. — If Megalopolis 
and Argos acted thus, Justin's hyperbole, ' omties ferme Graeciae civitates,' is 

*^ Memnon 13. 


some of the towns of the ArgoHd, — Argos itself was neutral, 
and others, such as Troizen, may still have been held for 
Antigonos, — Elis, and the four westernmost towns of Achaea, 
Patrai, Dyme, Tritaia, Pharai. There is no reason to suppose 
that Messene departed from her accustomed neutrality. As 
he could not move north by the Isthmus, Areus very naturally 
marched to Patrai and there got shipping; but instead of 
making for Boeotia to aid that country against Antigonos, he 
invaded Aetolia. The Aetolians were friends, perhaps allies, ^y 
of Antigoh'6's7 and Areus' action may have been properly 
meant to draw them off from assisting the king ; but the 
reason given in the tradition is the old religious pretext that 
they had occupied the Kirraean plain. Anyhow, Areus 
suffered the usual fate of those who thrust their hands into 
that hornet's nest : the Aetolians caught his arm}^ scattered 
and plunder-laden, and inflicted on him a considerable defeat. . 
Areus desired to continue the war in the spring of 279, but 
several states refused to follow him further ; Antigonos had 
been brought so low that they thought Spartan ambition the 
greater danger to the liberties of Greece. The most important 
result of the campaigns of 280 had been, not the liberation of 
Boeotia, but a small and scarcely noticed union entered into 
between the four little Achaean towns ; for it was the gerni_ 
of the Achaean Lcague.^'^ 

Meanwhile Keraunos, fortified by his victory, had made 
himself master of the whole of Macedonia and Thessaly out- 
side Demetrias. He had no difficulty in making peace with 
Antiochos ; but before this he had disposed of 3^et another 
pretender by coming to an arrangement with Pyrrhos. He 
had probably already made overtures to Pyrrhos before his 
victory ; and he found him accommodating. The Epeirot 

^''' On the allies, I differ somewhat from Beloch 3, 2, 305.— Troizen ; Polyaen. 
2, 29, I ; after 277, from the mention of Krateros, who probably did not govern 
in (Ireece till Antigonos became king of Macedonia.— Elis. This depends on 
whether the statue of Areus which they set up at Olympia belongs to this war 
or the Chremonidean.— A similar uncertainty attaches to Ptolemy's statue of 
Areus, Syli.- 212 ; we cannot say if Egypt stood behind the rising of 2S0. It 
is possible that it was Antiochos.— Spartan ambition. Beside Justin, Niese 
(2, 8, n. 2) here put Plut. Mor. 219 A, 9. But, again, this might belong to 
266/5.— Aetolia : Just. 24, i.— Achaean League: Polyb. 2, 41, 11-12 ; circ. 
spring-summer 280. 



king was on the eve of sailing for Italy, and had no thought 
for anything else ; Keraunos supplied him with 5,000 Mace- 
donian troops and some Thessalian horse, and gave him a 
daughter in marriage, and Pyrrhos, far from fighting for 
Macedonia, was content to trust his own denuded kingdom 
of Epeiros, during his absence, to Ptolemy's honour, what- 
ever that might be worth. Antipatros seems to have given 
no trouble ; and this left Ptolemy only one claimant to settle 
with, his half-siste^r'Arsinoe/''' 

But Arsinoe was his hardest problem. Kassandreia was 
very strong, and in feeling very independent ; Arsinoe had 
plenty of mone}', and therefore plent}' of men ; but above and 

\ beyond this was her own personality ; she had more than a 
man's spirit, one" 01 tne ablest TTeads in the world, and the 
krhg"oT'Egypt for own brother. To storm Kassandreia was 
out of the question ; Ptolemy resorted to fair speech. To 
keep his brother of Egypt from interfering he sent him humble 
letters, abjuring all claim to the Egyptian throne ; and he set 
himself to attack Arsinoe on her weak side, the side of her 
ambitions. She desired to be herself again a queenr^n(d~to 
see her eldest son on the throne of Macedonia. Ptolemy 
promised her both ; he would wed her himself and adopt her 
children, thus securing to her the immediate possession, and 
to her eldest son the reversion, of the throne. He even 
pretended to be in love with her, so that she might believe 
that she would manage him as she had managed Lysimachos; 
and when Arsinoe, who knew him too well, still hesitated, he 
did not shrink from confirming his good faith by the most 
. solemn oaths known to the Macedonian religion, swearing^ 
r among other things to have no wife but her, an oath at least 
lljwhich the outraged gods saw to it that he should keep. In 

" Trog. Prol. 17; Just. 17, 2, 13-15 and 24, i, 8. Pyrrhos left Keraunos 
' vindicem regni '.— Klotzsch, p. 216, n. 2, thinks this is all a blunder; the 
' vindex regni ' was Pyrrhos' son Ptolemaios, and the daughter of Keraunos 
an error for the daughter of Ptolemy I. Of course, such errors are common 
enough (see note 21); but seeing the especial pains Trogus took about 
names {J. H. S. 1909, p. 265 seq.), I would not suppose one in Justin without 
a reason. In this case, Antigone was not a daughter of Ptolemy I (Plut. 
P)'r?h. 4) ; and even if Ptolemaios had been left to govern Epeiros, the 
kingdom, denuded of troops, was nevertheless at Keraunos' mercy. I there- 
fore follow Justin. 


vain Arsinoe's eldest son Ptolemaios warned his mother that 
Keraunos meant treachery, ^^inbition finally centered fear; 
Arsinoe gave her half-brother herTTand, and^'as proclaimed 
queen in the presence of the army. She threw open the 
gates of Kassandreia ; Keraunos entered as a bridegroom, 
occupied the citadel, and at once proceeded to slay Arsinoe's 
two younger sons in her arms, while she vainl}' tried to shield 
theiruiidthJier body. She herself was allowed to take sanc- 
tuary at Samothrake ; her eldest son Ptolemaios escaped to 
the^Hyrian king JVIonunius, with whose aid he proceeded 
to wage unsuccessful war on the murderer. We shall meet 
him again. ^'^ 

The one state that had gained enormously b}- the troubles , 
of the last few years was Eg3'pt. She alone of the great -- 
powers had suffered not at all ; secure between the desert 
and the sea, she had watched the shipwreck of her rivals. 
But yesterday the world that ringed the Eastern Medi- 
terranean had numbered four great empires ; to-day those of 
Demetrios and Lysimachos were in ruins, and that of Seleu- 
kos was torn by internal struggles ; the Egypt of Ptolemy 
remained untouched. Lysimachos might have interfered with 
Egypt's new-found sea-power, and he was gone ; Demetrios' 
son might have sought to do so, and he had just been hope- 
lessly beaten both by sea and on land. Keraunos had too 
much to do at home to think of the Aegean ; and Ptolemy II 
held, for what it was worth, his half-brother's written renun- 
ciation of the crown and dominions of Egypt. At last Egypt 
felt herself absolutely secure in that rule of the sea which 
had fallen to her by default. In this 3-ear, 280, Ptolemy II 
issued invitations to the League of the Islanders and the 
other Greek states to send theoroi to the great festival in 

■" Trog. PtoL 24 ; Just. 24, 2 and 3. — Keraunos was a murderer ; but I dis- 
trust profoundly this narrative of Justin's. Justin's only interest in history is 
to show how the villain is punished at the end of the fifth act ; as Keraunos' 
punishment was undoubted, the temptation to provide sufficient villainy was 
great. — Arsinoe, as daughter of a king of Egypt, could still call herself 
queen ; I refer to the reality of the position. — Samothrake had belonged to 
Lysimachos, /. G. xii, 8, 150 = Syll? 190; and Arsinoe as his queen had 
dedicated there a round .temple, the Arsinoeion, /. G. xii, 8, 227 = O. G.I. 
15. — Monunius, ch. 2, n. 55. He was on good terms with Aetolia, a 
country naturally opposed to Keraunos as Lysimachos' successor. 


honour of his father which he was about to institute in 
Alexandria, and to declare that it should be of equal standing 
with the Olympic games ; ^^ and it was probably in this same 
year that he founded at Delos the festival in honour of 
Apollo which we call the first Ptolemaieia.'"'" For this festival 
(which must not be confused with the federal Ptolemaieia in 
which the Islanders worshipped Ptolemy Soter) Ptolemy II 
endowed the temple with a sum of money, from the interest 
on which every year a vase was to be purchased and dedi- 
cated to the gods of Delos, Apollo, Artemis, and Leto, and 
sacrifice and other incidents of a festival performed, the actual 
oftering of the vase being made by the choir of 3'oung girls 

*^ Nikouria decree : Sj//.- 202 = 7. G. xii, 7, 506. For the date, see 
ch. 4, n. 29. 

^° The beginning of the first Ptolemaieia was dated by Homolle to 283 
{Archives, 59, 60 ; see E. Schulhof, B. C. //. 1908, p. io6j. Going upon this 
Avithout examination, which was not then possible to me, I formerly sug- 
gested 285 (/. H.S. 1909, 278). There seems little doubt that both dates are 
wrong. — Taking the list of the vases of the first Ptolemaieia as given in four 
inventories, Sosisthenes, 250 (^. CH. 1903, p. 64 = /. G.xi, 287 B, 1. 100 seq.), 
Akridion, 240 (7. G. xi, 298 A, 11. 70-5), Boulon, 234 (/. G. xi, 313, 11. 57-61 j, 
and Menethales, 229 (/. G. xi, 320 B, 11. 20-4), we get the following: the first 
dated vase is under Sosimachos, 276 ; then seven dated vases are missing, 
that is, four next after Sosimachos and three next after Kallinos (with the 
variant that Sosisthenes gives a vase to Meilichides II which the otheis give 
to Meilichides 1) ; but there are a number of undated vases, i.e. no archons 
given but identified by mfxiai or ('nia-TdTui. Seven of these are common to all 
four lists. Akridion, Boulon, and Menethales have two more in common (one 
fTricrTaTovmos UoXi'iSov, one without tamias or epistates) ; this makes nine. 
There follows in Boulon one of its characteristic blanks, which f/hjy mean 
another vase ; but Menethales certainly gives one other vase, with epistates 
Aischylion (?), and there follows a blank with room for yet one more. The 
total then is certainly ten, with a possibility of eleven. Taking ten as certain, 
we fill the seven gaps, and put three before Sosimachos, which makes the 
first vase appear in 279 ; it is no objection that no vase appears in Hypsokles, 
279, as we know that the actual vase was often not received (or listed) till 
a year too late ; Boulon, for instance, is full of gaps for the insertion of the 
last vase of each series, an insertion for some reason never completed. This 
date, 279, is confirmed by two other (now recently published) inventories, 
Sosimachos, 276 (/. G. xi, 164 B, 11. 3, 7), and Antigonos I, 274 (/. G. xi, 199 B, 
11. 69, 92) ; the latter mentions six vases including that of 274, therefore the 
first vase is 279. — The inscription on the vases of the first Ptolemaieia is 
not known, I think ; it is not given in Akridion, on which we generally depend 
for the actual fTriyi)a<piii — '1 his note is based on copies of the unpublished 
inventories which Prof. Durrbach kindly lent me for perusal, and on informa- 
tion and arguments supplied by him ; and the suggestion that the undated 
vases must go in the gaps is his. In working it over I find, however, that my 
arithmetical process has differed from his ; but it reaches the same year, 279. 
I should like, however, to feel certain that Menethales did not give an 
eleventh vase. 


who are called Deliades, the maidens of Delos. Of the. 
numerous vase festivals at Delos this, though not the earliest, 
was the first to be founded by a king, with a political motive ; 
it emphasized the fact that Egypt now thought herself secure 
at sea. It was probably too at or about this time that the federal 
PtoTelnaieia of the Island League was enlarged to include 
the worship of Ptolemy II alongside that of his father.''^ 

The early spring of 279 saw Antigonos at the lowest ebb ot 
fortune that he ever reached. Beside Corinth and Demetrias, 
Tiraeus and Euboca, he held liotlTing but a few places In the" i 
"Argolid and the eastern half of Achaea ; and the movement K^ 
to independence was working so strongly in the Peloponnese^^^^ 
lhat4^eeould ha\''e no certainty of heiag able iiLXSLain even _ 
these. Whether Athens, exhausted by the late war, had 
actuall}' joined against him is uncertain ; but the government 
of his friends had been overthrown, and the nationalists had 
again seized the helm. In 280/79 Demochares was again 
active in politics ; it was in this 3'ear that he moved a decree 
in honour of his uncle Demosthenes."'- It was of course to 
some extent an academic matter ; Demosthenes was long 
since dead, and the line of his opponent Philip long since 
extinct; but Antigonos was grandson of the regent to whom, 
it was thought, Demosthenes owed his death, and the decree 
could never have been moved under a pro-Macedonian 
government. But it was very carefull}' worded ; no Antigonid 
was named ; Athens did not want to challenge Antigonos il 
she could avoid it. And if any challenge was meant, Anti- 
gonos did not take it up. The amount of territory he haq 
lost had, it is true, had the effect of throwing upon his hands 
a number of mercenaries who no longer garrisoned anything ;] 
and they had to be employed and fed. But it was not 
Athens that he was to attack ; events were shaping themselves 
very differently. 

'^' B. C.Jl. 1907, p. 340, no. 3 completing O. G. 1. 67. This had not been 
done at the time of the Nikoiiria decree (ib., p. 342). But it cannot be much 

'^"^ Decree in Plut. Mor. 850 F. — D;ite, ib. 847 D, Gorgias' year. — That 
the government had again become nationahst is perhaps also shown by the 
fact that in Pyanepsion of Glaukippos' year 277/6 the administration was 
superintended by a board ; 'E</). 'A/j;(. 1910, p. 19 = Michel 1483, 1. 23, rovi 
in\\ Trji SioiKijcrftj. 



For suddenly, in the spring of 279, news came to men in 
Greece before which their obscure struggles lost, for the 
moment, all importance. A great host of fair-haired Nor- 
therners had burst into Macedonia ; Keraunos, headstrong 
and rash, had not waited to mobilize, but had hurried to meet 
them with the first troops at hand ; his army had been cut 
j to pieces, himself wounded and taken, and the victorious 
Gauls, with the severed head of the Macedonian king paraded 
on the point of a spear, were plundering far and wide through 
the land. 



When Ephoros wrote the first universal history, he rounded 
off the world as he knew it with four blocks of largely un- 
known peoples : Ethiopians on the south, Indians on the 
east, Scythians on the north, and on the west, lying along 
the pathless ocean, Celts. ^ His knowledge of the Celts was 
of the vaguest, and in the rhetoric of himself and his followers 
they were posed as people of gentle manners, Philhellenes, 
devoted to the refining influences of music,^ — a sort of fourth- 
century counterpart of Homer's ' blamelesis Ethiopians '. And 
more exact information was slow in finding its way to Greece. 
Dionysios I had used Celtic mercenaries as early as 368, and 
had allied himself with Celtic stems against the Etruscans;" 
Agathokles of Sicily had also employed Celts ; ^ Alexander, 
before starting for Asia, had received an embassy from some 
Celtic tribe, men who talked to him a good deal about their 
own courage, but in whose friendship he may have found, 
during his absence, a useful counterpoise to the turbulent 
Illyrians on his frontier.^ Kassandros is said to have besieged 
a Celtic clan who had fortified a camp in the Haemus,^ and 
another tribe threatened Thrace during Lysimachos' reign.'^ 
This about sums up the actual knowledge of the Celtic world 

* Ephoros fr. 38 = Strabo i, 34; Ps.-Skymnos, 1. 170 seq. {G.G.M. I, 
p. 201). 

'^ Ephoros ap. Strab. 4, 199, (f)i\(XXt]vas ; Ps.-Skymnos, 1. 183 seq., 
X/jcoiTai 8e KeXrol Toiy eBecriv ' EWtjviku'is . . . 
aw iiovcTtKTJ S ayovai ras iKKKrjaias, 
(rjXovvTfs avTrjV j;/Lifp(icr<coy X'll"-^- 

— ' Ingenuas didicisse fidehter artes Emollit mores nee sinit esse feros.' The 
third century exactly reversed the picture, see p. 145. 
^ Xen. J/e//. 7, i, 20 ; Diod. 15, 70 ; Just. 20, 5, 4-6. 

* Diod. 20, 64, 2. 

^ Ptolemy I ap. Arrian. Anab. 1,4 = Strabo 7, 301, 302. 

" Pliny, A^. //. 31, 53 ; Theophrastos ap. Scnec. Quaest. Nai. iii, 11, 3. 

'' Paus. 10, 19, 5. 


which at the beginning of the third century was possessed 
by the Greek world east of Marseilles. Marseilles no doubt 
knew a good deal more ; but Marseilles was somewhat apart 
from the main currents of Greek life and thought, and she 
sometimes knew too much to be readily believed, as the 
reception given to the narrative of her very great traveller 
Pytheas shows. 

Long before the fourth centur}', Celtic tribes had outgrown 
their early homes in the north and had set out southward to 
win themselves new countries. It had been a wandering of 
the peoples that took long years to fulfil, but the upshot had 
been the settlement of races, afterwards known to Greeks 
and Romans as Celtae, in large parts of Gaul and of the north 
of Italy, of Spain and of the British Isles, in the valley of the 
Upper Danube, and over much of Central Europe, Bavaria, 
Wurtemberg, Bohemia. These were the Celts of the first 
migration. Their more southern tribes, in the valleys of the 
Po and the Danube, adopted a settled life and made advances 
in civilization ; their state of culture can be seen in that of 
the period known to archaeologists as that of La Tene. To 
a large extent they began to amalgamate with the natives of 
the conquered countries, a process easily traced in the case 
of Caesar s Celtae in Gaul and of the Gaelic-speaking peoples 
of the British Isles. Whether the Celts of the first migration 
included relatives of the Goidels no less than of the Brythons, 
q men as well as p men ; whether q men can be traced on 
the continent at all ; whether the Celts were indeed divided 
into q men and / men till a much later date, — these things 
are matters of controversy, of which the existence alone need 
be noted here.'' 

* On the Celtic migration generally : Arbois de Jubainville, Les Celtes 
(1900) ; C. J. Jullian, Histoire de la Gaule, vol. i (1908) ; B. Xiese, Galli in 
P. IV. (1910). — For the civilization of the southern Cells, beside Jullian, see 
especially A. Bertrand and S. Reinach, Les Celtes turns les vallees du Fo el 
du Datiitbe (1894; vol. ii of Nos Origines). — Bibliography of the La Tene 
culture in Jullian, p. 370, n. 2.— On the Celtae of Gaul as a mixed race, 
ethnologically, T. Rice Holmes, Caesar's Conquest 0/ Gaul, p. 281. — Goidelic- 
speaking people on the continent: J. Rhys, 'Celtae and Gs.\\\' Proc. Brit. 
Acad., vol. ii, 1905-6, p. 71, and ' The Celtic Inscriptions of France and Italy ', 
ib., p. 273 ; he has proposed for them the name Celtican. The distinction of 
q men and p men as early as Caesar's time has been denied by Arbois de 
Jubainville {Rev. Celt, xi, 1890, p. 2)77 \ Les premiers habitants de P Europe, 


In the fourth century the North again became straitened 
for room. Very vaguely, great migrations can be discerned, 
initiated perhaps by the tribes afterwards known as Germans, 
heretofore cooped up at the base of the Schleswig-Holstein 
peninsula, but already, with a brave and overflowing popula- 
tion, beginning that great expansion which in the course of 
a few centuries was to break down all the barriers of the 
civilized world. The Germans seem to have displaced a 
number of tribes dwelling between the Elbe and the Rhine,^ 
and these drove forward upon Central Europe, starting move- 
ment after movement in widening circles, like a stone thrown 
into a pond. Wild fighters, as 3'et untouched by the civiliza- 
tion of the settled lands, these tribes fell on the settled Celts, 
here driving them out, here collecting and sweeping them 
forward on their onward march, here again entering their 
service as mercenaries against the common foe.^'^ The Greeks 
and Romans were to know them as Belgae or Galatae ; ^^ 
they are the Celts of the second migration. Both names, 
Celtae and Galatae, soon came to be used indiscriminatel}^ ; 
itcould hardly be otherwise, when the men of the new migra- 
tion brought with them men of the old. Some of the new- 

2, pp. 283, 292, 294) ; but this had reference to Prof. Rhys' earlier argument, 
based on the name Sequana, and not to his more recent one, in which he 
inclines to identify Arbois de Jubainville's ' Ligurian ' with his ' Celtican ' as 
* the continental idiom akin to Goidelic'. 

° Arbois de Jubainville, Premiers /labttatits, vol. ii, p. 329. 

'" e.g. the Gaisatoi of Polyb. 2, 22, i. Polybios calls them Galatae and 
says that their name simply means ' mercenaries '. But I gather ihdX gaesattts, 
like Goidel, probably means ' spearman ' ; J. Rhys in Proc. Brit. Acad. 
1905-6, p. 344. 

" Identity of Belgae and Galatae ; JuUian i, 313-19. (I believe the term 
Belgae first occurs in the name of the Gallic leader of 279, Belgius or Bolgios, 
and the term Galatae in Pyrrhos' dedication of Gallic shields to Athene Itonia 
in 274 (Plut. Pyrrh. 26 = Paus. i, 13, 3).) This identification, together with 
the treatment of these two names as proper to the second migration, seems 
to me a great help in bringing order out of chaos. Of course, Greek and 
Roman writers generally use both Ccltae and Galatae indiscriminately— how 
could they help it ? but it is something to get the distinction of the thing. 
Niese {Galli in P. IV.) will not listen to the distinction between Celtae and 
Galatae, as it is unknown to Polybios ; and, since Diod. 5, 32 is decisive, he 
calls Diodoros late evidence : but this will not do, for Diodoros here is 
Poseidonios ; see Schwartz in P. IV., Diodoros 38, col. 678, and compare 
Diod. 5, 31, f«0"i ^f 7ra// (tiiTols Koi Troijjrai jieXm', ovi ffiipSovs opoftd^ovaiv, with 
Athen. 6, 246 d, which shows it comes from Poseidonios. In Latin, 'Galli ' 
gradually swallowed up every other term for the men of both migrations, just 
as ' Celt ' has done in English. 


comers conquered and settled Belgium, Northern France, 
and the south and east of England, even gaining a footing in 
Ireland;^'- others crossed the Alps and fought hard fights 
with Rome ; others again followed down the ancient highway 
of the Danube, drawn by the storied treasures of the yet un- 
touched world beyond the Balkans. These presently crossed 
the Danube and turned southward ; a legend remains which 
perhaps narrates how one of their chief tribes, the Scordisci, 
was led across the great river by a woman.^'^ Their first 
new conquest, some time in the fourth century, was Pannonia, 
the country to the north-west of Illyria, comprising the 
eastern part of Austria and the western part of Hungar3^ 
From here they continued to follow the right bank of the 
Danube, fighting with the Illyrian tribes already in occupa- 
tion : one body conquered the Autariatae, who occupied 
Bosnia, Servia, and the northern part of Albania, another 
the Ardiaei of Dalmatia.^^ These movements brought them 
fairly within the purview of the Macedonian monarchy. 
';' It was unfortunate for Macedonia that her king at the time 
was Ftoiemy Keraunos, a man surrounded by foes, over- 
confident and rash, and doubly branded as a perjurer and a 
;i murderer. It has been conjectured that one of his enemies 
i • rna}^even have persuaded the Celts to attack him ; ^^ but in 
^/ fact the Celts needed no persuading. Pressure from behind, 
' and the need of a new home, drove them on even more 
certainly than the desire for plunder. The Illyrian tribes, 
whose lives for generations had consisted in border warfare 
with their Macedonian neighbours, recognized that both 
peoples were involved in a common danger ; and the king of 
the Dardanians offered to Keraunos the aid of 20,000 men, 
an aid which he is said to have declined in insulting terms, 
saying that Macedonia would no longer be Macedonia if, 
after conquering Asia by herself, she could not guard her own 

'- A colony of the Menapii : J. Rhys, Proc. Brit. Acad. 1903-4, p. 70 ; 
Arbois de Jubainville, C R. Acad. Insc. 1907, p. 17. 

" G. Dottin in Rro. Et. Afic. 1906, p. 123 ; C. J. JulUan, ib. p. 124. 

^^ Pannonia : Just. 24, 4, 5. Autariatae, Polyaen. vii, 42. Ardiaei, Her- 
mippos ap. Athen. 10, 443 b. There is no need to credit the identical strata- 
gem in either case. 

^^ Ptolemaios, son of Lysimachos, was, or had recently been, at the court 
of the Illyrian king Monunius, Trog. Prol. 24. 


marches without help from Dardania.^" The Dardan king 
promptly took counsel for his own safety, and joined the 

These swept fonvard in three bodies, each doubtless led 
by different tribes. The first host, under a chief named 
Belgius or Bolgius, was destined to invade Macedonia by 
way of Illyria and the Aoos pass ; the second, under Brennus 
and Acichorius, was to overrun Paionia, follow up the Axios, 
and enter Macedonia by way of the Iron Gate ; the objective 
of the third, under Cerethrius^ was Thrace.'^ The leaders 
were followed by a mixed multitude ; settled Celts from 
Austria and the Danube, Illyrians like the Autariatae and 
the Dardanians, Thracians like the Maedi," slaves of every 
nationahty armed and unarmed, traders and camp foirowefs,"" 
with a long convoy of wagons bearing the women and chil- 
dren, the household goods and the plunder;-- while at their 
head marched the half-wild Galatae from the North Sea, men. 
might}' of limb, their strong rough-hewn faces, so strange'to" 
Greek eyes, surmounted by huge shocks of red hair, their 
throats circled by gold torques,^^ men who in action flung 
away target and plaid and charged half naked with their clay- 
mores," as their kinsfolk in Britain were to do later at the 
Battle of the Standard and on many another field. 

Their aim was to find a new land in which to settle. 
Plunder was by the way ; they did not bring their women and 

"^ Just. 24, 4, 9. '^ App. Illyr. 5. " Paus. 10, 19, 7. 

" Autariatae, App. IUyr\ 4 ; Uardanians and Maedi, ib. 5. The Maedi, 
however, were generally reckoned as Thracians ; Strabo 7, 316; Livy 26, 25, 
7 and 28, 5, 7 ; Pliny, N.H. 4, 11 (iS). The Scordisci, whom Appian also 
turns into an lllyrian tribe following the Celts, were Galatae ; Athen. 6, 
234 a; Justin 32, 3, 6-8 (perhaps from Poseidonios). The material thing is 
to note the manner in which the Celts carried along with them parts of the 
various conquered tribes. 

^^ For a Celtic host on the march, see Diod. 22, 9, I ; Polyb. 5, "jZ, i and 
2, 28, 5. 

^* The surviving representations of the Galatae in Pergamene art have 
been collected by P. R. von Bienkowski, Die Darstelhingen der Gallier in 
del- Jicllcnistischen Kimst (1908). The faces repay study; the Pergamene 
artists have caught, beneath the ruggedness, all the pathos of the men of the 
' losing battle '. — For Gauls in Alexandrian art, see A. J. Rcinach, Mon. 
Pio/, 191 1, pp. 37-115. None of the faces here are striking. 

" For this custom among the Gauls see Polyb. 3, 114, 4; Livy 22, 46, 5 
and 38, 21,9; and in particular Polyb. 2, 28, 8; 29, 7; 30, 2, 3, the best 
account of Celtic methods of fighting. 



children and liousehokl goods with them merely for the sake 
ofpli^mdering. In part too they effected their object. The 
Scordisci were to succeed in founding a kingdom in Servia, 
with its capital at Belgrade ; an unknown tribe or tribes were 
to establish in Thrace the realm known as that of T^dis ; 
three other tribes, the Tectosages, Trocmi, and Tolistoagii, 

were to settle as complete political units in Asia Minor. li. 

isju'cll, in considering Brennus' campaign in Greece, to bear 
in mind what the ultimate object of the Galatae was. 

What manner of men these Gauls really were is a little 
difficult to understand. We have only the accounts of 
enemies—enemies who were at first half mad with terror, 
and who took a long time to attain to a juster and more sober 
judgement ;^^ and terror is a state of mind which hardly 
makes for impartiality. An elaborate portrait of the Gaul at 
large can be put together from the Greek writers,-^ the main 
lines of which can be summed up in one word, instability ; 
but something seems wanting to a true picture, something 
that perhaps will have to be supplied, not by the historian, 
but by the poet.-'^ Instability in all its forms may be but the 
common attribute of all peoples at a certain stage of emer- 
gence from barbarism. No enemy ever questioned Gallic 
courage ; and if many of their women resembled Chiomara,^^ 
they could have taught some of the facile queens of Hellenism 
a valuable lesson. A people whose war-leader was named 
' Rede-giver ' -'' must have had at any rate a dim idea that 
there were matters more to the point than mere blows. Their 
poetry they had already begun to make ; they had bards, ^* 
who chanted la3^s before the host, lays perhaps akin to those 
which afterwards, in another land, were to grow into the 

-^ For an ultimate reasoned judgement, see Polyb. 2, 35. 

-^ As has been done by Jullian, op. c, vol. i, p. 343 seq. 

^^ As was done for the Germanic tribes by Wilham Morris. 

='' Polyb. 21, 38 ; Livy 38, 24 ; Plut. Mor. 258 D. 

" According to Arbois de jubainville, Les Celtes, p. 200, Brennus has 
nothing to do with the Welsh brenin, king, but is a masculine form of the 
Irish /'r/rt;/, ' parole.' Brennus therefore would mean 'he who speaks the 
word ', ' counsellor.' — If Brennus can only be explained from the Irish, 
does this not point to his being the chief of some settled tribe of the earlier 
migration, and not (properly speaking) a Galatian at all ? 

^* Poseidonios ap. Athen. 6, 246 d. He says they were poets jxer wBqs 
iivaivovs Xeyovres. 


story of the heroic feats of Cuchulainn or the witching charm 
of Deirdre ; even as, centuries before, other fair-haired 
Northerners had burst in on an older Greece, with songs of 
the glorious deeds of their heroes,^'' songs perhaps akin to 
those from which grew the mighty tale of the wrath of 

That these Gauls were aggressive and undisciplined, 
quarrelsome and vain, drunken and passionate, — these things 
mattered little to the world. But the Greek writers bring 
against them the definite accusation of cruelty ; and the 
accusation is perhaps true in the main, though it is to be 
remembered that the literary men of the third century did 
not confine this reproach to the Gauls. ''^ But we do know 
that their contemporaries were in fact terrified b}^ the idea of 
their cruelty ; ^^^ a picture of it remains, doubtless not under- 
coloured, in the horrors of the sack of Kallion ; the accusation 
goes on echoing through the Roman poets till the last days 
of the Western Empire. We need not accuse the Greek of 
cant in the matter. It is easy enough, in both Greek and 
Macedonian history, to pick out cases of what seems to us to 
be horrible cruelty. But, on the whole, manners were soften- Jj \) 
ing in the third century. It was no longer customary, ovl' "^^""^ 
taking a town, to slay the men and sell the women and children 
for slaves ; though the right of the conqueror to do this was 
undoubted."- It was no longer customary, even, to sell the 
men into slavery in lieu of death ; and when this undoubted 
right was exercised, as for instance by Antigonos Doson and 
ihe Achaean League in the case of Mantineia, it provoked a 
storm of protest, which we can still hear raging in the pages 
of Polybios.''" When we do meet with sheer downright 

"'•' KXe'a avh^utv. 

^" e. g. Douris accused Perikles of ai^oTt;?, Pint. Per. 28 ; and Phylaichos, 
I )oson and the Achaean League, Polyb. ii, 56. 

" Decree of Olbia for Protogenes, Sylli- 226, 1. 109, t^v tuv VciXaTciv w/nd- 
Ti)Ta. So the decree for Sotas of Priene, O. G. J. 765, 11. 8, 29. Note tliat 
this latter decree, in spile of the strength of its language, only records one 
;u:t on the part of the Gauls that was not usual in the warfare of the time, 

^'- On the legal position see Coleman Philippson, International Laiv and 
( iistojn of Ancient Greece and Rome, 191 1, vol. ii, p. 251 seq., with instances. 

■■' Polyb. 2, 56-61, a most illuminating attack on Phylarchos for having 
u cused the Achaeans of cruelty. 


cruelty, such as that of Philip V at Abydos, it strikes us as 
something monstrous. 

The tendency of the age was in another direction. It can 
be seen in the number of asyliai that begin to grow, places 
inviolable, immune from the operations and cruelties of war- 
fare ; a movement into which Delphi, always ready to use 
her influence to humanize war, heartily threw herself."* It 
can be seen in the innumerable boundary-arbitrations that 
appear in the inscriptions of this time.''^ Nothing had caused 
more fighting between city states than disputed territory ; 
and every one of the numerous arbitration awards now met 
with is a strangled war. It can be seen again in a new note 
of chivalry in war, largely due to the great Macedonians. 
The conduct of Philip II in liberating his Athenian prisoners 
without ransom ; the conduct of Alexander to the family of 
Darius ; the courtesies of Demetrios toward the Rhodians 
during the great siege ; Pyrrhos' treatment of his Roman 
prisoners ; Antigonos' treatment of P3Trhos' son; these things 
all tended to make war somewhat less dreadful."*^ Even the 
universal emplo3'ment of mercenaries was in the nature of a 
gain ; they fought hard, but without the personal hate and 
bitterness that citizen troops had used to import into their 
fighting. In particular, it is difficult to see how far the move- 
ment in favour of arbitration might not have gone in the 
Greek world, had it not been swamped, with so much else,'in 
the. monstrous wake of .Rome*., We can see, in fact, that the 
insistence of the Greek writers on the cruelty of the Gaul 

^^ See ch. 7, n. 133. 

"'' Greek states had -gone to arbitration from the fifth century onwards ; 
but the strength of the movement in the third century is shown, not merely 
by the increase in the number of actual arbitrations, but by the growth of a 
new spirit. To give just two instances. In the fifth century, Argos and 
Sparta, cities of high standing, made a treaty containing an arbitration 
clause, Thuc. 5, 79 ; but in the third century two piratical Cretan towns, 
Hierapytna and Priansos, are found doing the same, Michel 16. Again, few 
quarrels had produced more wars than the secular dispute between Samos 
and Priene ; even Alexander had failed to settle it ; but in the third century 
it was referred to the arbitration of Rhodes and really settled definitely 
(B.M. Inscr. iii, 403, and Introduction). — A valuable list of arbitrations in 
Philippson, op. c, 2, 131-48. 

^•^ Philip; Atsch.. de fals. leg. 16, Polyb. 5, 10. Alexander; Arrian 2, 12, 
3. Demetrios ; Plut. Dein. 22. Pyrrhos ; Cic. de Off. 1,12, quoting Ennius 
' Nee cauponantes bellum sed belligerantes '. Antigonos ; ch. 9, p. 274. 


means, not that there was anything ver}^ specially cruel about 
the Gaul, but that Greece resented the phenomenon of the 
natural man again obtruding himself on a society that was 
beginning to outgrow his ways. 

B elgius was the first of the Gallic leaders to enter Mace- 
donia, in the spring of 279, after feeling his way with an offer 
of peace for cash down, an offer which Keraunos naturally 
rejected with scorn. But Keraunos had not the patience to 
wait for his levies ; he met the Gauls at the head of a few 
troops, was defeated and slain, and his army cut to pieces. 
Panic ruled in Macedonia ; men flocked into the towns, and 
the towns closed their gates ; the barbarians at any rate 
would not understand siege works."' Keraunos' brother, or 
uncle, Meleagros, was made king b}^ the army, and deposed 
by it after two months as incompetent ; it thereon offered 
the crown to Kassandros' nephew Antipatros^ who met the 
same fate for the same reason after forty-five days, having 
gained nothing but the scornful title of Etesias, king of the 
Dog-days — the period for which his rule had lasted. •- There- 
upon one Sosthenes, a Macedonian, who was of humble birth 
but had perhaps been one of Lysimachos' generals, took 
command of the army ; he succeeded in reorganizing it, and 
inflicted a check upon the second Celtic host under Brennus, 
now attempting to enter the country. The army would have 
MSde him king ; but he refused the perilous title, and had the 
troops take the oath to him merely as general de facto. He 
seems to have been an able man, and for more than a year he 
held Macedonia together as far as possible ; but he could not 
keep back Brennus, or prevent the outlying parts of the 
country breaking off. Pa ionia was in Brennus' hands, Kas- 
sandreia and perhaps other cities were virtually independent ; 
and in a second battle Sosthenes was defeated by Brennus 
and compelled for a time to abandon the open countiy."^ 

" Just. 24, 5 ; Diod. 22, 3, 4 ; Pans. 10, 19, 7 ; Memnon 14. 

^* Euseb, 1,235 (Schoene). He calls Meleagros Keraunos' brother; Diod. 
22, 4 calls him a brother of Ptolemy, son of Lagos; the usual sort of con- 

^■' Sosthenes; Euseb. i, 235; Just. 24, 5 and 6; Diod. 22 fr. 4 ; Beloch 
3,2, 412. — Possibly he was already in high command under Keraunos, if 
he had been one of Lysimachos' generals, O. G. J. 12, 1. 12. The restoration 

L 2 


Belgius now drops out of the story ; according to onejiccgjunt, 
he left Macedonia with his pkmdcr;'*" Brenniis henceforth 
appears to hold undivided command. It appears, however, 
that he had lost a good many men in his battles with Sos- 
thenes, and perhaps considered that to attempt to maintain 
himself in Macedonia was too expensive ; anyhow, in the 
autumn of 279 he passed south through Thessaly, on his way 
to invade Greece. Some Thessalian nobles and Ainianian 
chieftains are said to have joined him.^^ 

Of the numbers with him we cannot pretend to form any 
kind of an estimate. The Greek writers give impossible 
figures ; and it is hopeless to deduce the number of the fight- 
ing-men in an army from a total which is not only uncertain 
in itself, but must obviously have included the women and 
children, the old men and dependants, the slaves and the 
camp followers, and all the unwarlike apparatus of a nation 
shifting its home. It is not in the least likely that Brennus 
had anything even remotely approaching the 160,000 fighting- 
men of tradition ; but to attempt to anal^'se the traditional 
numbers is waste of time.*^ The statement, however, that 
every horseman was accompanied by two armed and mounted 
islaves ■*" may well be true, as it suits a conquering aristocracy, 

is not certain, but it is evident from the phrase in Eusebios (i, 325, Schoene) 
that he was known to be Siraroy aTfjarrj-ye'iv ; and if he had held high com- 
mand it would explain Justin's reference to a man of humble birth as 'unus 
de Macedoniae principibus '. 

*" Paus. 10, 19, 7. 

*^ Just. 24, 7, 2; cf. Paus. 10, 22, 9 and 23, 13. The MS. reading in 
Justin is ' Emanus et Thessalorus duces ' ; but Schorn's emendation, ' Aenia- 
num et Thessalorum,' is absolutely certain as regards Thessalorum. 

•*- Paus. 10, 19, 9: 152,000 foot and 61,200 horse. Just. 24, 6, i : 150,000 
foot and 15,000 horse. Diod. 22, 9, i : 150,000 foot and 10,000 horse. Suidas, 
s.v. TuXuTai : 280,000 men at Thermopylai. — I cannot follow the reasoning 
which leads Jullian (p. 285, n. 11) to think Pausanias' figure correct. What 
the figures do show is, that in the first three authors cited the infantry totals 
derive from a common source while the cavalry totals do not : the common 
source for the infantry totals is therefore a good way back, i.e. the exaggera- 
tion started early, as one would expect. Any one desiring to accept 150,000 
should remember that the Gauls under Leonnorius and Lutarius, who held 
up Asia Minor for years, were only 20,000 men, of whom only 10,000 were 
armed when they crossed (Livy 38, 16 ; Suid. /. 6-.) ; and only 18,000 fought 
at Lysimacheia (Just. 25, i, 2). If we divide 150,000 by five, the average 
number of a family, we shall be a good deal nearer Brennus' fighting infantry 
than the tradition is. 

" Paus. 10, 19, II, TpifiapKia-ui. The word comes from good Celtic roots ; 
see Frazer, ad loc. 


Th£_ar«vs~oLih£ Galatae were sword and shield only ; and 
though the more settled Celts had some defensive armour, 
such as greaves,'** none seem to have adopted the cuirass. 
That their swords were long sweeping blades, two-handed 
and double-edged, adapted for cutting on]}^ and not for thrust- 
ing, seems beyond question. It is true that the Pergamene 
sculptors of a later day invariably represent the Gauls of 
Asia with a short, one-handed, thrusting sword ; but it must 
be supposed that this weapon was adopted by them after their 
arrix'al there. Their equipment was not of a nature to render 
them a match. Individually, for the heav3'-armed Greek.*"' 

The Gre elv resistan ca-.ta Rremvu?; took its place, in tJie 
Greek national consciousness, with the Greek resistance to 
Xerxes two centuries earlier ; these were the two great deeds 
cf Ilcllas against the barl^arian. Unfortiinatel}^,' later Greek 
writers were quite aware of this, and indulged in a conscious 
parallelism which makes it uncertain whether some recorded 
incidents have any foundation whatever in fact. The main 
lines of what happened are, however, tolerably certain ; and 
the contemporary inscriptions not only afford great help in 
winnowing awa}' those parts of the story that are valueless, 
but bear witness to the merits of portions of the detailed 
account left by Pausanias.*'' 

Brennus, with Acichorius as his second in command. 

'•'' Polyb. 2, 30, 2. Greaves are shown on the Aetolian monument at Delphi ; 
A. J. Reinach, yir'//;-;/. Intern. 1911, p. 184. 

''■"' Literature of the Gallic sword in Juliian, op. c, p. 372, n. 4. The two- 
handed two-edged sword without a point, which literary tradition assigns to 
the Gauls, corresponds to the swords of La Tcne II and III. The swords in 
the Pergamene sculptures, though no originals remain, were certainly one- 
handed stabbing swords. This sword was probably adopted by the Gauls 
after crossing to Asia ; it is not likely that it has anything to do with the 
'short pointed sword of La Ti^ne I, which is supposed to come between the 
later (short and pointed) Hallstatt swords and the long swords of La Tcne II. 
— The much criticized story of Polybios, 2, 33, 3, that the Gallic swords bent 
in battle and the Gauls straightened them again on their knees, is explained 
by S. Keinach, UEpee de Brennus [L' Ant/uopologie, 1906, p. 343), from a 
religious rite. The sword in fact was bent before burial so as to ' kill ' it. 
See such a bent sword, in the shape of an S, figured on p. 16S oi Les Celtes 
dans les vatlees die Po et du Danube. The provenance of these bent swords 
is examined by D. VioUer, Rev. Arch. 191 1, p. 130, who concludes that the 
rite was not practised before the third century, and then only by certain 

^^ On Pausanias' account see App. 6. 


passed south through Thessaly, where his men are said to 
have committed the usual acts of lawlessness ; ^"^ but as he 
gained the adherence of some of the Thessalian nobles, it 
may be supposed that Brennus, who is called an understand- 
ing man/*^ was putting pressure upon them to join him so as 
to exempt their lands from plunder. He directed his march 
toward Thermop3dai, where a Greek army had assembled to 
guard the pass ; outmanoeuvred its advance guard, which 
was holding the line of the Spercheios ; succeeded in cross- 
ing the river ; compelled the natives to build him a bridge, 
and left his Thessalian allies to guard it ; and, advancing, sat 
down before Herakleia. He had, however, no chance against 
the walls of the town, which had recentl}^ joined the Aetolian 
League, and into which the Aetolians had thrown a garrison ;*^ 
he therefore masked it and moved on to the pass. 

The burden of the defence of the pass had fallen entirely 
on north and central Greece, the countries most immediately 
threatened. Antiochos and Antigonos had indeed each sent 
a small force of 500 mercenaries, and it seems that Antigonos' 
general in the Piraeus equipped a few Athenian triremes to 
co-operate ;'''' but Egypt held aloof altogether, as did the states 
of the Peloponnese. In part this was due to their mutual jea- 
lousies ; Messene and Megalopolis were afterwards at pains to 
explain that the}' had not been able to move because Sparta had 
refused to give them an undertaking not to invade their terri- 
tories while their men were absent.''^ Another reason given, 
that the Pel oponnesians in ge ne ral trusted to the fortification s 

■•^ Paus. 10, 20, I, ra eV Qe(Tan\ovs TrapavofjLfjfiaTa. 

'"' lb. 20, 6, ovTf TvdvTn (KTvvfTOi . . . ci)s ("iv Tii liofifiapos. 

^■' lb. 21, I. 

^^ The small but identical number of mercenaries sent, 500, points to an 
arrangement between Antiochos and Antigonos. — It is quite clear from /. G. 
ii, 323 = Sj//.- 205 that Athens, as Athens, sent no fleet. Yet I cannot 
believe that l^aiisanias' very detailed statements in tv.o separate books as to 
the co-operation of Athenian ships rest on no foundation ; and as the decree 
only shows that no Athenian crc7c>s were sent, the obvious explanation is that 
in the text ; Athenian hulls, manned by Antigonos' governor with mer- 
cenaries for marines and slaves or metics for oarsmen. Many reasons arose 
for concealing the fact of Antigonos' co-operation, and Pausanias, or his 
source, often atticizes. — Had the ships been Egyptian, the only conceivable 
alternative, Kallimachos must have seized on the fact in his hymn to Delos, 
where he was very hard up for matter for his $vp6s atdXoi. 

" Paus. 4, 28, 3 ; 8, 6, 3. 


of the Isthmus, sounds like reasoning of the days of Xerxes;'"- 
but it is not so absurd as it sounds. What they trusted to 
was not their own fortifying of the Isthmus ; it was not theirs 
to fortify, ^ut they k new that Antigonos could and must hold 
Corinth, and that the Gauls could neither storm it nor (with- 
out a fleet) turn it ; they w ere absolutely- secure. It would 
need" an Aristophanes to do justice to the spectacle of the 
Peloponnesians, who were actually in the middle of an attempt 
to turn Antigonos out of Greece, sheltering in comfort behind 
RTs^Tmes. Antigonos must have stiffened the garrison at 
Corinth and perhaps drawn his lines right across the Isthmus ; 
it may be that in the winter of 279/8 he was there in person. 

Pausanias gives the Greek roll of honour, the defenders of 
the pass. The list unfortunatel}' contains a mistake at the 
one point where it can be checked ; the Athenians did not, 
as Pausanias says they did, send a fleet. Otherwise the list 
is probable enough ; the names and the numbers suit with 
facts otherwise ascertained ; and the chances are of course 
that such a catalogue would be correctl}^ preserved. Boeotia 
sent her full lev}', 10,000 hoplites and 500 horse, under four 
Boeotarchs. Phokis sent 3,000 foot and 500 horse ; Lokris 
700 foot ; the Megarians 400 and a few horse. Athens sent 
1,000 picked hoplites under Kallippos, and 500 horse. Aetolia 
sent the largest contingent of all ; it cannot well have been 
under 12,000 men, of whom 7,000 were hoplites ; and it may 
have been more. There was an obvious difficulty in Aeto- 
lians commanding Boeotians, or vice versa ; the supreme 
command was therefore given to the Athenian Kallippos."'" 

Brennus is said to have made a frontal attack on the pass, 
and to have been beaten back. He must have seen at once 
that under such conditions his half-armed warriors had no 
chance against an adequate force of heavy-armed Greeks : 
and he reasoned that if he could remove the most dangerous 
ff)rci', till' .\<t'>li;in--, his task- wmilrl be more feasible. He 
thciLUpon dclachcd a bud}' of men under Orestorius and 

•''^ Paus. 7, 6, 7. 

•''' Paus. 10, 20, 3-5. For the stretifjths of Boeotia and Aetolia sec ch. 2, 
pp. 69, 64. The Athenian decree /. (J. ii, 323 = Sj'//.'^ 205 shows that the 
Athenian hoplites were eniX(KToi. 


Combutis, who retired across the Spercheios bridge into the 
friendly Phthiotis, and thence invaded AetoHa. Their ob- 
jective was the httle town of Kalhon ; their, orders, pre- 
sumably, were to make such an example as should draw off 
the Aetolians to defend their homes. Their orders were 
carried out only too well. Kallion was taken, every living 
creature butchered with outrages inconceivable, if true, and 
the town fired. For the moment, Brennus achieved his 
purpose. The Aetolians at Thermopylai left their post and 
hurried home ; and with them the whole of Aetolia, old and 
young, men and women, rose as one to avenge their country- 
men. Laden with plunder, the Gauls had turned northward 
again, after severely handling a little band of hoplites from 
Achaea who had crossed over to assist their neighbours, and 
who made the mistake of attacking in formal order. The 
Aetolians fought differently. Every path in that land of 
mountain and forest was beset, ever}^ tree hid its man ; the 
Gauls, with no defensive armour but targets, were helpless 
against arrows and javelins ; if they pursued, the foe's know- 
ledge of the country bore him off; as they left pursuing, he 
returned once more to the attack, urged on by the women, 
who fought even more bitterly than the men. Less than half 
of the Gauls struggled back to the main body. Kallion was 
well avenged, and the Aetolians had, of their necessity, made 
the discovery, to be made later by the Romans, that the Gaul 
was only formidable if permitted to come to close quarters.-^"* 
The exact details of what meanwhile took place at Thermo- 
pylai are not particularly trustworthy, but the main outline is 
clear. Brennus' object was to clear Thermopylai and let his 
people through. Even without the Aetolians, the Greeks 

^^ On the Kallion episode, Paus. lo, 22, 2-7, see G. Soteriades, B. C. H. 
1907, p. 303 ; A. J. Reinach,_/<9«r«. Intern. 191 1, p. 228. Note that Phthiotis 
is friendly to the Gauls. — It seems that Kallion is Veluchovo, the ttoAjj 
KaXAiTToXirni' of Sylll^ 919 ; see Uittenberger, ad loc, and Soteriades, /. c. 
The inscriptions give both ethnics, KaXXteuy and KaXXiTroXiVa? ; the numerous 
references are collected by Reinach, I.e., p. 237, n. 3. Kallion was rebuilt at 
once ('£<^. 'Apx- I905) P- 55 gives KaXXitvy, and is (:/r^. 276-274 ; see ch. 5, 
n. 20); perhaps with help sent by Pyrrhos [Syll." 919 cannot well be before its 
destruction). Reinach, I.e., thinks that the old name Kallion was replaced 
by Kallipolis sometime after 273. — Soteriades, I.e., thought he found at 
Kokkalia the battle-field on which the destroyers of Kallion were slain. But 
Pausanias describes a long running fight. 


could perhaps still have held their position against a direct 
assault ; but they could now spare but few men to guard 
against a flank attack, and Brennus at once resolved to try 
the effect of turning the pass in the traditional manner. He 
himself led the turning force, an unencumbered body of 
warriors, whose strength is given by Pausanias as somewhat 
less than one-fifth of the available fighting-men, as he con- 
ceived them. It was in fact a comparatively small flying 
column ; the bulk of the arm}^ on Pausanias' own showing, 
remained with Acichorius.^^ The story runs that the Hera- 
kleots and Ainianes guided Brennus over the path by which 
Hydarnes had once marched to surprise Leonidas ; that, like 
H3^darnes, he drove off" the Phokians who held the path ; and 
that the Greeks at Thermopylai were warned in time to avoid 
being surrounded, were taken off" by the fleet, and scattered 
to their homes. The resemblances to Herodotos' story are 
patent ; but the differences are no less patent ; without affirm- 
ing or denying details, it is sufficient to say that the pass was 
undoubtedly turned. Unlike Hydarnes, however, Brennus' 
was unable to take the defenders in the rear ; he may have 
been too late, or he may not have been in sufficient force. 
But the news that the position was turned was enough ; the 
Greek contingents that were still at Thermopylai retired to 
defend their homes, and the pass lay open to Acichorius 
and the host. Brennus had achieved his purpose. 

Whether Brennus had always intended to sack Delphi, or 
whether his raid was unpremeditated, must remain doubtful. 
Perhaps the former is the more likely view ; for unless his 
intention was known or suspected, it is impossible to see 
how Magnesians came from Asia, (if indeed they did come 
from Asia), in time to aid in the defence.''^ The idea that 
Delphi was no longer worth sacking may be dismissed. Two 
generations had elapsed since the Phokians had plundered it ; 

•" Paus. 10, 22, 10: 40,000 men. Acichorius is left eVi Tfj a-TpaTiu, The 
smallness of the number of the defenders of Delphi, even allowing for a national 
Phokian rising, also shows that Brennus' force was not great. One in five 
was also the number sent against Kallion, Paus. lo, 22, 2 ; it may represent 
some Gallic custom of composing a flying column. 

•''" S}'//.'^ 259, 1. 9. It does not follow that Magnesia formally sent troops. 
The words of tlie decree would be satisfied if a few Magnesians had happened 
to be at Delphi and had joined in the defence. 


and quite apart from the natural increment in the way of gifts 
from persons and cities, the damages assessed on Phokis had 
been regularly paid, and the temple had also received some 
very large sums of money from other sources.'"''^ Delphi was 
not of course the main object of the Gallic invasion, in any 
caseflhat object was settlement. It was now open to Brennus 
to rejoin Acichorius and continue the invasion of Greece in 
full force ; and in deciding instead to raid Delphi, it appears 
that the Gallic leader, who had hitherto displa3'ed capacit}' 
and resource, was carried away by the mere desire of plunder 
and committed a most serious error; both traditionand analysis 
point to the conclusion that he started on his raid in ignorance 
of the whereabouts of the largest body of the enemy, the 
Aetolians. According to tradition, he turned Thermopylai at 
the same time that the Aetolians were defeating Orestorius 
and Combutis ; consequently it appears that he must have 
set out for Delphi before hearing of the defeat of this division 
of his men,''^ and in the belief that the Aetolians were fully 
occupied at home. 

Meanwhile the victorious Aetolians, following up the beaten 
enemy, learnt that the pass was turned, and that Brennus 
with a fl3'ing column had entered Phokis, presumably making 
for Delphi, while nothing remained to bar the advance south- 
ward of the main body of the Gauls. The Ae t o lian .leaders 
w^ere faced with the responsibility of a tremendous decision ; 
were the}^ to attempt to save Greece or the temple of their 
god ? To their honour they chose rightly ; they detached 
a handful of men to help organize resistance at Delphi, and 
with their main body set out in pursuit of Acichorius," That 

" For instance, under Dion, (336/5 Pomtow), Apollo's temple received a 
sum of over 100 talents from an unknown source ; B. C. H. 1900, pp. 124, 133. 

•'■'' Paus. ID, 22, 8, eV rw axnCd xp6v(^; ib. ID, 23, I (22, 12), ov8(vn fVi ('nicrxwi' 
Xpovov. This has been well brought out in A. J. Reinach's excellent account, 
Jo7ii-7i. Intern. 191 1, p. 231. 

®' Paus. 10, 23, I, TO 8e fidXicTTn ei> aKnj] ruiv \Itu)'Ku>v eTpcmfTo frrl rrjv fitra rov 
'AKi;(a)piou (TrpnTiav. This action of the Aetolians is the key to the entire 
campaign, and obviously comes from some writer who understood the military 
position ; and now that we have the Koan decree we see that it must be 
correct (see App. 6). The Aetolians were admitted afterwards to have been 
the saviours of Greece ; (see e.g. Polyb. ix, 35, the admission of an enemy) ; 
and those modern accounts which, following the corrupt version which 
became current in Greek and Roman literary circles, treat Delphi as the 



leader, leaving his Thessalian allies to hold the Spercheios 
bridge,^" came rolling slowly through Thermopylai with his 
unwieldy train of women and children, baggage and wagons, 
guarded in front and behind by the warriors of the host. The 
Aetolians, wise in their recent experience, had no intention of 
risking a pitched battle ; but the}' clung to his flanks and rear, 
pelting him with missiles, cutting off all stragglers and foragers, 
breaking off parts of the chain of wagons, absolutely prevent- 
ing any provisioning, and killing whenever they had the 
chance. In these circumstances Acichorius had made but 
little progress by the time that the decision had fallen at 

The defence of Delphi,"- as formally narrated by later 
Greek writers, becomes a poetical duplication of the similar 
story in Herodotos; the stars in their courses fight against 
the impious invader, the crags of Parnassos fall on him and 
crush him, gods and heroes take the shape and the arms of 
men and hurl him back from the sanctuar}'. The main lines 
of what did happen were perhaps somewhat as follows. 

Brennus made for Delphi by forced marches. Beside the 
Delphians, there had assembled for the defence of the sanc- 
tuary a handful of Aetolians, 400 Lokrian hoplites from 
Amphissa, and some part— how large we do not know — of 
the Phokian levies."'' With them were a little body of men 
from Magnesia on the Maeander, who had perhaps crossed 

objective of the campaign, and Brennus' force as the main Gallic host, make 
nonsense of this. — The letter A on the Gallic shields (see note 74) may also 
be a valuable corroboration of the fact that the Aetolians faced Acichorius 
and not }5rennus. 

«» Paus. 10, 23, 13. '"'' lb. 23, I (22, 13). 

*- For the defence of Delphi see Paus. 10,23 and Just. 24, S. On the mira- 
culous element see further App. 6. If we strip this away, little of Justin is left; 
but Pausanias has various details from his good source, e.g. the way in which 
in the morning the Phokians worked round to Brennus' rear. The death of 
Aleximachos may be taken from his statue at Delphi. — The snowstorm is 
common to every account, and I hope we may believe in it. — It is possible 
that the Apollo 13elvedere represents the god defending his temple, one of the 
two statues of Apollo that the Aetolians dedicated at Delphi, Paus. 10, 15, 2 ; 
(on this controversy see Frazer, Pausa/tias, vol. v, p. 345;. If, however, I am 
right in the view taken in App. 6, the Aetolian version of the defence did not 
give the glory to Apollo. 

** Paus. 10, 23, I : levies from every Phokian city. But Paus. i, 4. 4 says 

(T(f)i<Tii' . . , 4>co>Cf'&)i' ai'TfTa^drjrTav ni Ttii noKfis nfp\ tov Ilapvaaov oiKnvuTd ; SO It 

seems that all the Phokians did not arrive at once. 


from Asia to aid in the defence,'^'' even as one trireme had 
come from Italy to fight against Xerxes. A batde was fought 
outside or on the walls, in which the Phokian leader Alexi- 
machos fell ; but his death was not in vain, for the Gauls 
were checked. Dark storm-clouds gathered o\t r Delphi 
during the battle at the wall ; the priests from the temple 
came down to the warriors as the storm burst, declaring that 
Apollo was with them ; perhaps, among the excited defenders 
of the sanctuary, there were some who claimed that they 
themselves had seen the son of Leto manifest to his worship- 
pers, riding the whirlwind and directing the arrows of his 
lightning against the impious invaders. Whether the Gauls 
actually entered Delphi or not must remain obscure ; it is 
known that Apollo's own temple remained untouched and 
inviolate.'"'^ However it may have been, Brennus could not 
hold any footing he may have gained ; he withdrew and 
formed a camp for the night outside the town. 

That night the Greeks were strongly reinforced, for the 
entire Phokian people were rising to wipe out the stain of 
the Sacred War and fight their way back into the good 
graces of Hellas ; there also came i,2oo Aetolians under 
Philomelos. Morning broke on a raging blizzard of snow 
and sleet, in the midst of which the Greeks attacked Brennus' 
camp, avoiding close quarters as usual, while some of the 
Phokians, secure in their local knowledge, worked along 
the flanks of Parnassos to take him in the rear. Suffering 
horribly under the hail of missiles, to which they could make 
no repl}^, the Gauls nevertheless held firm till Brennus him- 
self was struck down ; then they broke ground, slew all the 
wounded who could not follow, and set out on their backward 

^* See note 56. — Strabo (14,647) says that these Magnesians were AsX^w;; 
dnoyovoi rmu olKrjcrdvTap to. AiSvfia opt] iv QerTokla. As no tribe of Delphians 
in the Thessalian Magnesia is mentioned elsewhere, the word is generally 
treated as corrupt ; but, if correct, it might point to some traditional con- 
nexion between Magnesia on the Maeander and Delphi through these Mag- 
nesian Delphians. 

"^ The Koan decree (C R. Acad. Insc. 1904, p. 165) is decisive that the 
Gauls did not plunder Apollo's temple, and it is no longer worth quoting late 
writers to the contrary. (All the literary references are given by S. Reinach, 
ib., p. 15S.) But it is still open to belief that they got some plunder from other 


path, carrying their fainting leader and strugghng on through 
an endless running fight with the whole Phokian nation.*^^ 
Something of the horror of that retreat for the strangers, 
who could neither see their way nor retaliate on their foe- 
men, may still be gathered from the triumphant words of the 
Delphic hymn to Apollo, which celebrates their death * in the 
drift of the wet snow '."' A remnant only reached Acichorius ; 
but the news had travelled faster than they ; the Athenians 
and Boeotians were already in the field again, and Acichorius 
turned back. The Aetolians, who had borne the burden of 
the campaign against him, now hung triumphantly on his rear, 
and chased him to his base camp outside Herakleia and thence 
. north to the Spercheios, inflicting great damage ; Brennus, it 
is said, slew himself in despair, while the Thessalians at the 
Spercheios changed sides and themselves fell on their bar- 
barian allies.^* The Gauls who got through retreated north- 
ward, and Greece was saved.*^* 

As to who was her saviour, there were no two opinion 
Most u( the fighting had fallen upon the Aetolians ; they had 
held back the main body of the enemy single-handed ; theirs 
had been the first victory, theirs the tactics of ever}^ victory ; 
and at the end they had followed up the routed foe till his 
last wagon recrossed the Spercheios. Phokis had fought 
well, and she received the reward she coveted, readmission 
to the Amphiktyonic League ;^- and she dedicated a statue of 
Aleximachos at Delphi."^ But Aetolia, as was just, .gained 
most from the war. She staTted Torthwith on a new career. 
Her influence and the territory of her League steadily in- 
creased ; her control of Delphi was no longer questioned, and 

"" Paus. 10, 23, 9-10. 

'"'■' B. C. H. 1894, p. 355, Sik(& vypai xi\}^voi f-V ^iiKal. ** PaUS. lO, 23, 1 3. 

*'•" Brennus' host was annihilated to the last man at the Spercheios (Paus. 
10, 23, 13) ; again on the subsequent retreat (Just. 24, 8, 16) ; and again by 
the Dardanians (Uiod. 22, 9, 3). Those who survived all this founded the 
kingdom of the Scordisci in Servia (Just. 32, 3, 6-8, see JuUian l, 302), and 
crossed to Asia to settle in Galatia (Livy 38, 16, 1-2). It may be suspected 
that the Scordisci were part of lielgius' command. 

'''' Paus. 10, 8, 3 ; I.G. ii, 551 : see H. von Gaertringen, Delphi in P. W., 
col. 2569, and Beloch 3, 2, 326. — It seems obvious that at the same lime the 
Phokians were released from the remaining instalments of their fine ; see the 
notes to /. G. ix, i, 1 10 and 1 1 1 on the time it would have taken them to pay. 

"' Paus. 10, 23, 3. 


to it she added the control of the Amphiktyonic Assembly. 
At Delphi she set up many memorials of the repulse of the 
great invasion. Statues of the gods, two of Apollo, one of 
Artemis, and one of Athene ; '^ statues of the Aetolian leader 
Eurydamos and her other generals ; "" a great statue of Aetolia 
herself, as an armed woman seated on a pile of Gallic shields ;""* 
chiefest of all, the actual shields of the vanquished Gauls, 
which, with a suitable dedication, balanced on the temple the 
Persian shields which the Athenians had taken from other 
vanquished barbarians at Marathon. ^^ But Aetolia went 
further than this. She had saved Greece, and she knew 
it ; and it was she who instituted at Delphi the festival in 
memory of the Deliverance of Greece, the Soteria. The 
Greek states adjudged its contests to be of equal importance 
with those of the Nemea in the athletic and of the Pythia in 
the non-athletic events ; and theoroi were sent out all over 
the Greek world bearing invitations to the gathering which 
was to commemorate the victory gained over the barbarians 

'- Paus. 10, 15, 2. ''^ lb. 10, 16, 4 and 15, 2. 

''* Paus. 10, 18, 7. The monument on which the figure of Aetolia sat has 
been found at Delphi, and published by A. J. Reinach,y<^«;v/. Inter7i. 191 1, 
p. 177; see also Rev. Et. Anc. 191 1, p. 44. The statue appears on the 
Aetolian federal coinage ; B.M. Coins, T/iessa/y-At'/o/M, p. \\''i seq.; Head^ 
283 ; Head " 335. Reinach, /. c, p. 1S7, gives a complete list of all the coins 
bearing on the subject. The monument shows Gallic shields only ; the coins 
generally give Gallic and Macedonian shields. Sometimes on the coins the 
shields bear letters, A on the Gaulish, AY on the Macedonian; see B.J/. 
Coins, PI. XXX, 5. A probably represents Acichorius ; P. Gardner in B.M. 
Coins, I. L. ; Head ^ 335 ; see G. F. Hill, Historical Greek Coins, 1906, p. 116, 
n. 4, who gives some other instances of letters on shields. Whether AY repre- 
sents Lykiskos may be doubted. He was sent in 316 by Kassandros to govern 
Epeiros (Diod. 19, 36, 5) ; in 314 Akamania also was put under him (ib. 67, 
5) ; and in 312 (ib. 88, 2) he fought three battles with Alketas of Epeiros, 
winning the first and third. There seems to me nothing to show that the 
Aetolians ever defeated him (and Klotzsch suggests no such defeat, though 
A. J. Reinach, I.e., p. 214, has arrived at a contrary' conclusion). And if they 
did, why did they wait thirty-five years to celebrate the event .' Moreover, 
the letters AY appear on at least two other coins (not counting Lysimachos'); 
a copper coin of Kassandros (G. Macdonald, Greek Coins in iiie Hiinteriiui 
Coi/eetioft, i, 336, no. 20), and a tetradrachm of Philip Arrhidaios (J. N. Svoro- 
nos,/oiirn. Ititern. 2, 291). The Gauls might have adopted shields from the 
spoils of Macedonia ; or might they be meant for the shields of Brennus' 
Thessalian allies, just as after the Persian war the Athenians dedicated 
shields with the inscription : 'A^/j^mot emh Mr^Scoz/ mi QrjjSaioiv (Aesch. c. 
Ctes. 116).' 

■'^ Paus. 10, 19, 4. At the south-west corner was found a metope bearing 
the trace of a Gallic shield ; HomoUe in B. C.H. 1894, p. 176. 


who had attacked the Greeks and the temple of Apollo, the 
common possession of Hellas."'' 

It is time to return to the affairs of Macedonia. That un- } - 
happy country^ invaded, plundered, and reduced almost to \ 
anarchy, was perhaps getting some relief under the rule of I 
Sosthenes ; but Sosthenes was not uniformly successful in 1 
his contest with the barbarians, and he could not hold the^^ 
whole country together ; his refusal of the perilous crown left 
the way open for many intrigues. Antipatros, king of the 
dog-days, seems to have had a following in one part of the 
country ; there were partisans of Pyrrhos, of Ptolemaios son 
of Lysimachos, perhaps of Antiochos ; while the great city of 
Kassandreia had broken off from the kingdom altogether. It 
had been founded by Kassandros to replace Potidaia, and 
settled by the inhabitants of several Greek towns, including 
(it appears) many of the surviving Olynthians.'^ Ptolemy 
Keraunos had assigned it as a residence to his mother, Eury- 
dike, sister of Kassandros and divorced wife of Ptolemy I ; 
and in the troubles that followed on Keraunos' death, she, 
supported by mercenaries who garrisoned the citadel in her 
interest, ruled the town for her own hand. How long her 
rule lasted is not known ; but after a time she disappears 
from the scene, and one ApoUodoros stands forward as 
champion of the democrac^^^and -prevails on Eurydike's 
mercenaries to hand over the citadel and join the popular 
cause. Appllodoros_travels the usual course to warda tyrgjiay ; 
he institutes a festival in honour of Eurydike, who had 
given ' liberty ' to Kassandreia, refuses a bodyguard, pays 
court to Eurydike's mercenaries, and in the fullness of time 
raises a revolt of slaves and artisans and seizes the supreme 
power.''' He enlists a bodyguard of Gauls, attracts mer- 
cenaries by raising the standard rate of pay,'-' and begins 

'"^ Reply of the Athenians to the invitation ; /. G. ii. 323 = Sj//.'^ 205. Of 
the Chians, S///.''^ 206. It is possible that we possess a fragment of the reply 
of the League of the Islanders ; see /i. E. G. 1910, p. 315. 

" Diod. 19, 52 ; Pliny, N. H. 4, lo (17), 

''* Polyaen. 6, 7, 2.— The coins EvpvSiKfcov, which used sometimes to be 
attributed to Kassandreia, are now given to Smyrna, the Eurydike being 
Lysimachos' daughter ; Imhoof-liiumer,/;;/';^^/!. 8, 1905, p. 229 ; Head" 592. 

"'■• Diod. 22, 5, 2. 



to consider an ambitious foreign policy ; it may be that his 
dream was, that Kassandreia should play the part once 
played by Olynthos. 

Of those who had some claim to the vacant throne of 
Macedonia, far the most favourably situated appeared to be 
Antiochos. He had the resources of an empire at his back, 
and he had prepared his ground rather carefully. Perhaps 
he treated his accommodation with Keraunos as a personal 
matter onl}-, a thing at an end with Keraunos' death ; at any 
rate in 279 he was doing more than feel his wa}'. How much 
he was doing it is impossible to say. It is possible that he 
had, or acquired, an actual footing in some part of Mace- 
donia, as a city Antiocheia appears there, apparently near 
Arethousa : it is not, however, possible to say from what 
period it dates. Certainly he had partisans in the country, 
and he struck coins with Macedonian types and cultivated 
good relations with Aetolia.*^" Nor was Aetolia the only 
Greek power whose friendship he affected. He sought to 
win the favour of Athens ; '^^ it is almost certain that he did 
win the favour of Sparta.^- Whether any power at all, either 
Ptolemy or Antiochos, had stood behind the upheaval of 
Greece in 280 is uncertain; it may have been a purel}^ spon- 
taneous conflagration. But by 279 it seems that Antiochos 
jwas supporting Sparta, and that this was one of the reasons 
•why Greece took fright at Spartan ambition and refused 
to follow Areus on a second campaign that year. The 
common ground uniting Sparta and Antiochos was enmity 
to Antigonos. 

The reason of the most obscure war which broke out in 279 
between Antigonos and Antiochos thus becomes fairly clear. '^^ 

*° The city: Pliny, A^. H. 4, 10 (17), Antiochenses. I cannot find it men- 
tioned elsewhere, and it might be an existing city renamed at a later time. — 
The coins : P. Gardner, B. M. Coins, Seleticid Kings of Syria, p. xxiii. — 
G. Macdonald, Huntcriati Collection, iii, 17, says that satisfactory evidence 
of provenance is wanting. They may then not have been struck in Mace- 
donia at all. Some of them show the jawbone of the Kalydonian boar, 
indicating some connexion with Aetolia. 

*^ For the details of the restoration of Lemnos to Athens, begun by 
Seleukos and completed at this time by Antiochos, see Ferguson, Athens, 
pp. 155, 156. 

*- Because Sparta allied herself with his ally Apollodoros ; see n. 88. 

*^ This is the war of Memnon, 16-18, Antigonos' part in which is given in 


Each riaimed Mp-cedonia; each thought the other his mn5^^ 
dangerous rival. Whether Seleukos had been king of Mace-^ 
3bnicl ds Uiy-e"'or not, Antiochos considered that he had ; *^* 
consequently he himself, in his own eyes, was king of Mace- 
donia. Antigonos ahva^'s had his eyes firmly fixed on his 
father's kingdom, and no explanation of this war can be 
satisfactor}^ which does not take account of this fact. Why 
Antigonos did not invade Macedonia itself on Keraunos' 
death it is hard to conjecture ; it seems certain that he did 
not. He cannot have had much of a following there ; and 
we may suppose that he thought that a man just beaten out 
of Greece stood little chance in Macedonia, and that it was 
best first to attempt to dispose of Antiochos' claims and 
incidentally regain some prestige. It is just possible that, 
in the course of the ensuing war, he did attempt to get a 
footing in Macedonia, and failed ;^^ but it is certain that 
sometime in 279 he commenced operations by sailing to Asia 
Minor to attack Antiochos.^'' The two kings seem to have 
suspended hostilities in the autumn of 279 in order to send 

18. See also Trog. Pro/. 24; Just. 25. i. — Date. It seems to me clear that 
Memnon places the origins of this war — both the war of Antiochos on 
Nikomedes and Gonatas' intervention— after the destruction (15) of An- 
tiochos' first expedition by the Bithynians and therefore not earlier than 279 ; 
and again before the Gauls crossed to Asia (19), and therefore not later than 
278, as the Gauls crossed in 278/7 (Paus. 10, 23, 14). I take the dating then 
to be, that Antiochos' expedition was defeated by Nikomedes (15) in 280; 
Antiochos then (279) makes war on Nikomedes, who gains the assistance of 
Herakleia (i6j, also in 279 (see 19); by this act Herakleia finds herself at 
war with Zipoites (279); and 'about the same time' (18) Antigonos and 
Antiochos go to war. Their war therefore began in 279 ; but I assume after 
Keraunos' death. — Trogus is not in conflict with this. For as he keeps the 
affairs of Asia and Europe separate, all we can say is that he puts this war 
between Keraunos' peace with Antiochos [Prol. 17) and the crossing of the 
Gauls to Asia {Prol. 25). — A. J. Reinach, Rev. Celtique, 1909, p. 47 seq., 
dates this war (^T/ZdV Antigonos became king of Macedonia, and says that the 
war which damaged Kyzikos in 279/8 {O.G.I. 748= I, 23 in Hasluck's 
Cycicus) was not the war between Antigonos and Antiochos, but that 
between Zipoites and Nikomedes. This last may be true in any case ; but 
I cannot agree with his main thesis, which has no support in the tradition, 
and is directly at variance with Antigonos' marriage with Phila. 

** A cuneiform inscription of 268 calls Seleukos ' king of the Macedonians ' ; 
Lehmann-Haupt, K/io, 5, 248; 3, 539, n. I. 

*^ See n. 94. 

"" Ferguson, Athens, 155, thinks the reason of the war was a desire on 
Antigonos' part to assert a claim to Asia Minor. This will not account for 
Antiochos' combinations. 

1475 M 


each a small force to Thermopylai ; but with the spring of 
278 the war blazed out afresh. 

Antiochos apparently occupied a strong position. He allied 
himself with Apollodoros, the ambitious tyrant of Kassan- 
dreia;^' and as Apollodoros also allied himself with Sparta,^^ 
— (an alliance which Sparta's enemies insinuated had been 
shamefull}' sold by her for money down), — and Sparta had 
the following of a number of Peloponnesian states, Antiochos 
appeared to be at the head of a strong combination of powerv^ 
with a ^ood gatew ay into Macedonia. But there was no real 
ba sis of union, a nd the want of suflicicnt sea-power definitely 
sundered Antiochos from Sparta and both from Apollodoros, 
while the latter meant to work for his own interests. And 
even by land Antiochos could not reach his allies. 

Antiochos in fact was hemmed in by enemies. He could 
not cope at once with all the revolts in his great scattered 
kingdom ; and the new king of Bithynia, Nikomedes, barred 
his passage to Europe. Bithynia was fighting for her separate 
existence as a nation ; and while her people were still un- 
civilized enough to cling passionately to their national inde- 
pendence, their king was sufficiently inclined to the ideas of 
Greece to add to the national resistance such strength as the 
sciences of civilization could give. The Bithynians had al- 
ready cut up one army sent by Antiochos ; and Nikomedes 
had secured the friendship of the powerful Northern League, 
formed b}^ Herakleia, Byzantion, and their friends.^° This 
combination against Antiochos naturall}- attracted Antigonos ; 
the Byzantines were his hereditary friends, and he had not so 
many friends that he could afford to neglect an}^ of them. 
One af -the reasons for his crossing to Asia in 279 was, no 
doubt, the invitation of the Northern League, and the per- 
ception of the fact that, if he were going to fight Antiochos, 
he must co-operate with those of his friends who were already 
making head against him. Between them, as against Antio- 
^.chos, they undoubtedly controlled the sea. 

" Polyaen. 6, 7, 2. *'" Paus. 4, 5, 4-5. 

*' ]Memnon i8 on the support given to Antiochos. 

^° See Memnon 15, 16, 19. This last gives the other cities in the League, 
Chalkedon, Tios, Kios. 



The actual events of the year 278 are extraordinarily 
obscure. It may have been at this time that the Spartan 
Kleonymos drove Antigonos' garrison out of Troizen.^^ Kyzi- 
kos in some way was damaged."^ The fleets of Antiochos 
and Nikomedes met, but did not fight.^^ This statement, 
however, shows that Antigonos' fleet was not co-operating 
with his allies, but was elsewhere ; and possibly with this 
fact should be connected the persistent tradition which asso- 
ciates Antigonos with Macedonia prior to syy.^"^ That he did 
not become king of Macedonia till after his victory at Lysi- 
macheia in 277 is the one quite certain fact of this time ;^^ we 
may perhaps conclude, therefore, that the mystery of his 
movements in 278 conceals an attempt to get a footing in 
Macedonia, possibly in connexion with operations against 
Apollodoros. If so, it was an attempt that failed ; that is, if 
by Macedonia we are to understand Macedonia proper rather 
than Thrace. Sosthenes may have had a firm hold of the 
army while he lived ; and it is very possible that the strange 
phenomenon of a non-monarchic government in Macedonia 
was attracting the powerful friendship of the democratic 
Aetolians,~who, though recently friendly to Pyrrhos and 
Antigonos, considered (as the event was to show) that of the 
two it was Pyrrhos who had the first claim on them. At any 
rate a city bearing Sosthenes' name appears soon after among 
the Aetolian towns, a fair proof of their sympathies at this 

"' Polyaen. 2, 29, i; Frontinus, Strut. 3, 6, 7 ; Beloch, 3, i, 580, n. 2; 
3, 2, 306. Of the three inscriptions which Niese ii, 12, n. i, attributed to 
this event, /. G. iv, 748 is, according to Fraenkel, first half of fourth century ; 
/. G. iv, 750 (which mentions Queen Stratonike, Lysimachos, and some 
captured ships, and might have been of extraordinary interest) is too muti- 
lated to make anything of. C. I. G. 106 may well belong here. — Niese also 
thought (2, 24) that it was now that Kleonymos, as Apollodoros' ally, took 
Edessa (Paus. 4, 5, 4 ; Polyaen. 2, 29, 2). But I cannot imagine a Spartan 
army operating in Macedonia at this time ; it is too remote from all third- 
century evidence, and how could they reach it .-' I have therefore adopted 
Beloch's view that he took it when in Pyrrhos' service ; ch. 9, p. 266. 

"^ O. G. I. 748 ; see n, S3. "^ Memnon 18. 

'* Just. 25, I: Antigonos is in 'Macedonia' before his battle with the 
Gauls, which is fought in that country. Memnon 14 : Antigonos nroXe/xfu'ou 
ui>ppt]fjitvov TT]v MaKefiorwi' Xayifiavu (ipx^v. See ch. 5, n. 42, Addenda. 

'' See n. 104. 

"* The ethnic Soxr^eveu? occurs '£</>. 'A/;^. 1905, p. 55, and again (7. D.I. 
2536 = Syil? 293. 

M 2 


It ma}^ be, however, that the tradition as to Macedonia 
means no more than that Antigonos obtained a footing in 
Thrace, a country recently part of Macedonia, but which 
cannot have been claimed or held b}^ Sosthenes, and was 
completely cut off from Antiochos, who did claim it. Cer- 
tainly Antigonos was operating there in the spring of 277 ; it 
was clear by then that Antiochos could not hope to conquer 
the Northern League, and by attempting to occupy Thrace 
Antigonos could both aid his allies and do something for 
himself. Then, once more, the Celts intervened_^ 

One body of them had already come upon the scene in 278. 
After Brennus' host had withdrawn northward, a band of 
Gauls, composed either wholly or in part of those who had 
originally entered Macedonia with Brennus, began to pass 
eastward along the Thracian coast. The}^ were 20,000 strong, 
but of these only 10,000 were armed ; their leaders were Leon- 
norius_and Lutarius. Naturally they did much damage ; by 
one account, perhaps exaggerated, they even managed to enter, 
and plundered, Lysimacheia ; ultimately they descended on 
the Hellespont, and began to bargain with Antiochos' governor 
for a crossing. The details are variously given ; but Niko- 
medes forestalled Antiochos, and secured the promise of their 
aid if he brought them over. He brought them over ; and 
they proceeded to aid him in a manner that may be under- 
stood from the inscriptions of the terrified towns of Asia. 
With them we have no further concern.'^" 

Of the three bodies into which the GaUic invasion had 
divided itself, two — those of Belgius and Brennus— had now 
ceased to be a menace to civilization in the Balkan peninsula. 
Many had been slain, and the survivors had crossed to Asia 
or withdrawn into Servia, though possibly some scattered 
bands still ranged Macedonia for plunder. But there still 
remained the third bod}^, the men who under Cerethrius had 
invaded Thrace ; they seem, after the winter of 279/8, to Tiave 
received an accession of strength, perhaps from some of 
Brennus' people. These overran Thrace, conquered the 
independent Thracian tribes of the interior, who had never 
yielded to L3^simachos or any other Macedonian king, and 
" Memnon 19 ; Livy 38, 16. See next note. 


by the spring of 277 were rolling seaward, threatening the 
Greek cities of the Chersonese.'"* 

Somewhere near Lysimacheia lay Antigonos, his fleet drawn 
ashore, his army of mercenaries landed for the defence of the 
city. Whether he was there by accident or design, whether 

he had been seeking a footing in Thrace for himself, or 

whether the cities, terrified by the passage of the Gauls in """^sSs, 
278, had sought from the one organized force at hand protec- ^1 

tion against this new danger, cannot be said. It is probable 
enough that in a combination of both reasons lies the cause 
of Antigonos barring the Celtic advance. The leader of the 
'Gauls, whose strength is given as 18,000 men, commenced 
operations, as Belgius had done against Keraunos, by throw- 
ing out a feeler in the shape of an embassy. The story— a 
quite untrustworthy one in its details — runs that Antigonos 
received the envoys courteously, invited them to dinner, and 
showed them everything they wished to see, before dismissing 
them to their folk. Next night he abandoned his camp, and 
posted his army out of sight, leaving his fleet still ashore as 
a bait ; for he felt certain that the Gauls would attack him, 
and that speedily. He was not deceived ; the first onslaught 
of the barbarians wasted itself on the empty camp ; laden 
with plunder, they proceeded to attack the ships, and found 
themselves trapped between the sea in front and Antigonos 
behind. Antigonos won a great and a bloody victor}'.^' 

'* According to Polyb. 4, 46, i, the Gauls who, under Comontorius, founded 
the kingdom of Tylis liad left ' home ' at the same time as Brennus' men and 
had escaped (or avoided) toi/ Trf^jl AeXc^oij KifSwoi', and came to the Helles- 
pont. They were therefore part of Pausanias' third division, that which 
under Cerethrius invaded Thrace; this body had been employed during 279 
and 278 in conquering the (letae and Triballi, Just. 25, i, 2. Seeing how fast 
the tendency grew to attach everything to Brennus and Delphi (see App. 6), 
it is wonderful that three clear notices of this division of Gauls remain. 
There can be no doubt that it was with some of them that Antigonos 
fought. — Droysen (ii, 2, 354 and iii, i, 192) thought he fought with Comon- 
torius' men, which is not far wrong ; F. Stahelin, Gesc/i. d. kleinasiat. Galater-, 
1907, p. 5, seems to agree. Beloch (iii, i, 585) does not specify which Gauls. 
Niese, (ialli in P. IV. 1910, col. 619, rightly saw that it was /w/ the men of 
Leonnorius and Lutarius, as had been supposed by A.J. Reinach, J^t'7'. Celt. 
1909, p. 47 seq. It is certainly tempting to follow Reinach in bringing the 
capture of Lysimacheia by the Gauls (if it be a fact) into connexion with .Vnti- 
gonos' victory ; only, if so, it was not Leonnorius and Lutarius who captured 
it ; and it seems better to keep to the tradition. In any case, its "'capture' 
may be as untrue as the once credited sack of Delphi. 

*" /. G. ii, 5, 371b = Syll.^ 207 = Michel 1482 ; Diog. L. ii, 141 (who 


Its effects were far-reaching. The least of them was, that 
it stopped the advance of the Gauls towards the Aegean, and 
turned the energies of the remainder in a new direction, the 
foundation of the inland kingdom of Tylis.'"^° For it did much 
more than this. The Aetolians had indeed already defeated 
Gauls more than once, but in their own way and by their 
own guerrilla tactics, tactics which contained within them- 
selves the confession that it was best not to let the barbarians 
get to close quarters in open field. But now an army of Gauls 
had been fairl}^ met and cut to pieces^ AntigonO^ tra^ won 
more than a victor3'; he had won unique and invaluable pres- 
tige. The fear of him now was not only in the hearts of the 
Gauls ; it was in the hearts of his neighbours. ^"^ Greek cities 
passed him decrees of thanks ; ^°^ pictures of his exploits 
against the barbarians were dedicated at Athens to Athene 
the Giver of Victor}' ■^^'■^ he too was of those who had brought 
deliverance to men of Hellenic race. " 

Whether he now invaded Macedonia, or received an invita- 
tion to come, is nowhere told : but Sosthenes was dead, the 
country in absolute anarch}^, and the Macedonian farmers 
were read}' to welcome any man strong enough to hold the 
gates of the land against the barbarian. One way or the 
other, in the expressive words of his old teacher Menedemos, 
Ihe * came into his own'; the exile returned home ; he became, 
■at last, king of the Macedonians.''^* 

gives the locality) ; Trog. Pro/. 25. Details, more than dubious, in Just. 25, 
I and 2. 

'"» Polyb. 4, 46 ; Trog. Pro/. 25. ^o' Just. 25, 2, 7. 

^-^ e.g. Eretria (n. 104). ^"^ Sy//.- 207 = Michel 14S2. 

'°^ Decree of the Eretrians, moved by Menedemos, in Diog. L. ii, 142 ; 
the preamble runs fTreibi) (^aaiXevs 'Avrlyovoi yLuxil viKijaa^ tovs j^ap^iipovs 
TTapay'iviTcii fli rvjV I8lav, Kctl raXXa Tidi'Ta TTiKtaad Kara yvu)jir]v' fbo^e ktX. 
The phraseology expresses the return of an exile, (see e.g. Teles Tre/ji 4>vyr]s, 
Hense'^, p. 24, 1. 10, if you are an exile ouSe e^ovaiav e^en elaeXBuv «iV t']v 
Idiav), and the decree is conclusive proof that it was his victory which gave 
Antigonos the kingdom of Macedonia and that he had not been king there 
before it. — The date of the battle, 277, is pretty certain. Antigonos became 
king of Macedonia at /atest in the first half of 276 (first and fourth lives of 
Aratos), ai ear/iest late in 277 ; and the battle was only shortly before. See 
generally Beloch 3, 2, 71-80. — The Eretrian decree is now confirmed by 
Apollodoros, {P/ii/o/. 71, p. 226), d&' vaTtpov (after his defeat by Keraunos) 
%{Ti<jiv y ) (I'lKTjo-as K(X)tovs tov j3a{(T)iX{e)vfiv MaK((86vo}v W^"'"'^) J '^ ^^^ restora- 
tion be correct. 



Macedonia, as Antigonos found it, wa-s- in a ota fe e - - of 
anarch}'. Fur a while, after Keraunos' death, a kind of 
government had been kept together by the personahty 
of Sosthenes ; but Sosthenes died, probably in 278, and the 
c ountry had s ince then had no effective gove rnment at all . 
Pretenders were numero us enough ; An tipatros, king ol the 
Dog-days, seems to have been exercismg autHority in some 
part of the country, where he had a following; possibly 
Arsinoe's son Ptolemaios was ruling another : we hear also 
of one Arrhidaios or Alexander, who from his name must 
have claimed kinship with the house of Philip II, and who 
perhaps represented himself to be a son of Philip Arrhidaios 
and Eurydike.i But none of the various pretenders could 
claim the allegiance of the people on any ground of descent : 
for even AriffpmrDS'th'e^eg^m'iTnrt-TTeveriTeu^ klhg ; he had 
only ruled for another, and could give no better claim to his 
descendants than he had had himself, Antigonos himself, as| 
Antipatros' grandson, had no better claim than the king ofl 
the Dog-days had; Antigonos as son of the de facto kingV 
Demetrios was in no better position than a son of the de facto I 
king Lysimachos, and not in so good a one as Pyrrhos, 
who had been king himself, and who could at least, alone of 
all the pretenders, claim some connexion with the old royal 
line through the marriage of his second cousin Olympias ' 
with Philip II. Macedonia seemed like the apple of Paris, 
thrown down among men with the legend attached, ' To the 
strongest.' It had happened that the army had taken the 
view that this-would prove to be Antigonos-. "TheTrown was 

1 Euseb. I, 235 (Schoene) gives Arrhidaios, Syncell. ap. 7'-. //.(/. 3, 696, 
Alexander. 1 take them to be the same person, named Alexander 

■^Qy~ , 



1 legally in their hands, the hands of the Macedonian people 
under arms, to give to whom they would;- and Antigonos' 
title was derived direct from the Macedonian people, and not 
from any hereditary claim. 

His first care was to diminish the number of hi's rivals. 
Pyrrhos, fortunately, was for the moment far off and fully 
occupied. Next in importance came Antiochos ; and with 
the king of Asia, worried by the Northern League and the 
Galatian invasion, Antigonos was able to come to an arrange- 
ment, if indeed he had not made peace with him even before 
the battle of Lysimacheia. A line was drawn between their 
respective spheres, — probably it lay rather to the east of 
the old boundary between Thrace and Macedonia, the river 
Nestos, and gave Antigonos Abdera, — and it was agreed that 
Antigonos should not meddle to the east of that line or 
Antiochos to the west of it ; Antigonos renounced his claims, 
if an}', to the coast towns of Thrace, and Antiochos re- 
nounced his claims to the crown of Macedonia, which he 
could not hope to enforce in any case." By a further term 
of the treaty Antigonos was to many Phil§^' the daughter of 
Stratonike by Seleukos, who in the already involved relation, 
ship of the two houses was Antiochos' step-daughter and 
half-sister and Antigonos' niece. .^Ji-Cnceforth there was peace 
and friendship between the two kings down to Antiophes'- 

This left Antigonos free to attack the king of the Dog-days. 
The name of Antipatros was one to conjure with, had this 
Antipatros been capable ; he had a following, and Antigonos 
had to reckon up his means of settling with him. His own 

- See n. y^^. 

^ Justin 25, I, I, puts the peace before Lysimacheia. But the terms ot 
the arrangement, which, though only a deduction from events, are a quite 
certain one, point to after. (This peace may be referred to in O. G. I. 219, 
1. 13.) These terms are not contradicted by Antigonos retaining the style 
^aaiXfvs 'Airtynro? (inai^ews ArjiJLrjTpiov MoKfficor, if MiiKedmv imports Asiatic 
sovereignty {j.l/.S. 1909, p. 269); such survivals are common enough in 
history. Neither are they contradicted by Antiochos I, in 268, calling 
himself in a Babylonian inscription, * First-born son of Seleukos the king of 
Macedonia' (C. F. Lehmann-Haupt, Klzo, 3, 539, n. i); for the statement 
was true, and the world at large did not read cuneiforms. It has been 
thought that Abdera was included in Macedonia, because neither Polybios 
nor Livy mentions it, at a later time, among the Ptolemaic possessions in 
Thrace (Beloch 3, 2, 279). Also it has no autonomous coinage at this time.- 


arm}' of Greek mercenaries was not too numerous, and very 
precious ; it was still his ultimate support, and he could not 
afford to waste it. To enroll Macedonians was quite out of 
the question. The country's most bitt er need was rest and 
recuperation ; nothing could have been more unpopular than 
an immediate levy in a domestic quarrel, and Antigonos had 
no popularity to spare. He was as yet nothing to any 
Macedonian, except a strong man who might give rest to 
the people ; if he wanted to remain on the throne, he would 
have to walk warily. It was by no means certain that Mace- 
donians zvoitld fight for him, whether against Kassandros' 
nephew or any one else. To engage more Greek mercen- 
aries, even if they could have been obtained, was expensive ; 
and in fact the supply was no more unlimited than the re- 
sources of his treasur}'. 

In these circumstances he took the audacious step of 
imitating his barbaria n frie nd Niko medes of Bithynia and 
enlisti^ng a number of Gauls.^ The more part were proDaDly 
the remains of the host which he had beaten at L3-simacheia ; 
but it is quite possible that bands of Gauls were still moving 
about in Macedonia or on its northern frontier, and to enroll 
such would serve the double purpose of freeing the countr}' 
districts from them and providingTiimself with troops. The 
first step once taken, every king is found enrolling Gauls as 
a rpatter of course. The Gauls were not the equal, man for 
man, of the heavy-armed Greek or Macedonian foot-soldier ; 
but they were numerous, courageous, and above all (to begin 
• with) moderatel}^ cheap.'' Antigonos paid his Gauls, for the 

■• Polyaen. 4, 6, 17. 

^ On this olsscure subject of mercenaries' pay, see the Koan decree, B. M. 
Inscr. ii, 343 (= Michel 642, G.D.I. 3624, Paton and Hicks 10), with Sir 
C. Newton's commentary ; Beloch 3, i, 323 ; A. J. Keinach on O. G. I. 266 
in Rev. Arch. 1908, vol. xii, p. 174 seq., very full. The difficulty is the rela- 
tionship between criTrnHcjiov, o^iovLov, and niados ; according to Reinach, the 
first two were originally distinct but came to be used indifferently, and the 
airrjpeaiov did include the fiiadt's — which after all is the natural interpre- 
tation of the Koan decree. What cificen troops got in the third century is 
clear, from four trustworthy inscriptions. Antigonos Doson paid Cretans 
from Kleutherna i drachma and at least 2 obols a day, and Cretans 
'from Hierapylna I .Alexander-drachma a day [li.C.H. 13, p. 47, nos. I 
and 2 = R. Ph. 26, 1502, p. 301, nos. 7 and 81 ; in the treaty between Aetolia 
and Akarnania of 276-274 ('K(^. 'Ap^- I905) P- 55), apeltast was to get a day 
9 obols = i^ (Corinthian) drachmai, a horseman a Corinthian stater ( = 


campaign against Antipatros, a lump sum of about 24 drachmai ' 
each ; a Greek mercenary would have required a drachma 
a day at the very least. But the matter did not end there; 
for the Greek expected to be engaged by the year— the 
military' year of either nine or ten months— and also expected 
provision to be made for him when past fighting, either by 
way of food or of an allotment of land ; but the Gaul, at any 
rate at first, could be paid out of hand and dismissed. The 
Gauls ^wept^Antipatros out of Macedonia; dead or other- 
wise, he vanishes from history, and with him the house of 

Antigonos, however, had trouble with his" Gauls when pay- 
day came. The}- had brought their families with them, and 
they now claimed that his promise of so much to 'each Gaul' 
included every woman and child in the camp, and threatened ^ 
to kill the hostages in their hands if their demands were 
not complied with. Antigonos met them in the same sort ; 
he sent for their chiefs to come and fetch the gold, seized 

roughly 2 Attic drachmai), and a hoplite something between, .presumably 
2 Corinthian drachmai (= i Attic drachma 2 obols) ; (so A. Wilhelm, 'E<^. 
'Apx- 191O) 152; 12 obols); and q Rhodian trireme (Michel 21) got about . 
50 Rhodian drachmai a man a month, or over i^ a day. For mercenaries 
there are no exact figures ; but Reinach's conclusion (p. 202) of an Attic 
drachma a day, to cover both o-trr/peVioi^ and /iito-^of, may be correct ; anyhow 
it cannot be too high^ and may be too low. This makes the Gauls cheap. 
Antigonos gave them each a ;:^^pu(ro{)j/ MaKeSofiKor, a stater of Philip or 
Alexander; nominal value 20 drachmai (Head^ 223-5), but it was merely 
bullion and worth what it would fetch, which in the time of Alexander was 
nearly 23 drachmai (Droysen- i, 155 ; Head' 196) ; and gold may have 
risen a little in price since Alexander, so we-may perhaps take it at 24 
drachmai. If we take Polyaenus in the natural sense, each man got this for 
the campaign ; so if the campaign lasted a month or more, the Gauls got 
much less than a drachma a day, i.e. much less than a Greek. When 
Perseus was engaging Bastarnae he offered a lump sum apiece, clearly for the 
campaign, as no duration is mentioned (Livy 44, 26, 4 ; App. Mac. 18, 2; 
I cannot agree with A. J. Reinach in B. C. H. 1910, p. 295, that he was to 
engage them for six months) ; this rather bears out the above. — Beloch, 
however (/. c), takes it that Antigonos' Gauls got a stater a montJi. Antigonos 
paid altogether 30 talents = 180,000 drachmai, i.e. 7^500 men at 24 drachmai 
for a month, or 3,250 for two months. He may have engaged 3,000 men and 
a chief at so much a month for the duration of the campaign ; but no other 
engagement of this nature is known. It seems better to suppose that he got 
7,000 men at 24 drachmai (=1 stater) a man for the campaign (the balance 
going to the chief), it being anticipated that one battle would suffice. The 
Gauls may not, as yet, have realized the market conditions. The very 
different lump sums offered by Antigonos and Perseus merely reflect the fact 
that the one campaign was to be against a pretender of little power, the other 
against Rome. 


them, and exchanged them for his hostages, after which he 
paicmie warnoTS~^iTe.^" The- naturatr^utts followed ; the 
barbarians conceived a new feehng towards a king who could 
neither be beaten nor bluffed; and three years later the 
Gauls in Antigon os' service died^forhirn to the last man. / 

At the same time Antigonos got rid, somehow, of two other 
pretenders, Arrhidaios, and Ptolemaios the son of Lysimachos 
and Arsinoe, who vanishes for a while to reappear in very 
different circumstances. These various successes no doubt 
did something to settle the minds of the country people ; 
but the towns were another' matter. While the Gauls had 
been ravaging the open country, the towns had closed their 
gates and withstood them ; and although details are only 
known in the case of Kassandreia, it i^ likely enough that 
SQiri£-Jif- the other Jarge towns had also become somewhat _ 
detached from the central power, ai}d had developed a desire 
for independence. Apollodoros of Kassandreia, however, was 
powerful and dangerous ; he had been in alliance with 
Antigonos' enemies, and had to be dealt with as soon as 
possible. One of the consequences of the treaty between 
Antiochos and Antigonos must of course have been that 
Antiochos abandoned Apollodoros: and it may be that the 
^tyrant had also undermined his position by his own wicked- 
ness. For scanty as our sources are, they are yet full of 
highly coloured references to the horrors of Apollodoros' 
rule. We read of such things as the cannibal feast b}^ which, 
when he set out to obtain power, he bound his fellow- 
conspirators to himself; and of the nightmare dream in 
which, in return, he saw himself being flayed alive and eaten 
by Scythians, while his daughters danced round him with 
their bodies turned to flame, and his evil heart screamed at 
him from the caldron in which it was seething, ' See what 
I have done to thee.''^ His cruelty passed into a proverb, 
and the sufferings of his townsfolk into a traged}'.^ His 
teacher in wickedness is said to have been a Sicel called 

'■ Polyaen. I.e. * ^ 

' Polyaen. 6, 7, 2 ; Pint. Mor. 555 n ; Diod. 22, 5, I. 

* If the sufferings of Kassandreia, which were long remembered (Pans. 4, 
S> SX giive Lykophron the material for his tragedy Kao-trai/S^etf, as Niebuhr 
thought, the stories in Plutarch and Polyaenus may come from this source. 


Calliphon, who had learnt his business in the promising- 
school of some Sicilian t3Tant; and by his advice all who 
owned property in Kassandreia were not only plundered but 
were put to the torture, men and women alike, if their contri- 
butions fell short of the desired amount,*^ 

Antigon os was at last able to take^Apollodoros in hand 
serKitusIy;. O jjhe course of this campaign only the termina- 
tion" is' known, when Antigonos had already shut his enemy 
up in Kassandreia. Here he was confronted by the difficulty 
that the city was enormously strong for a siege,^*^ and Gallic 
mercenaries were of no use against fortifications. It may have 
been at this time that Sparta attempted a diversion in favour 
of her ally against the remaining possessions of Antigonos 
in the Peloponnese, and took Troizen from him ; ^^ but this 
event more probably belongs to the war with Antiochos. 
In any case, Antigonos did not quit his grip of Kassandreia. 
But just as he had had to fashion a new^inslfumehtto dispose 
of Antipatros, so he saw that he required yet another to over- 
come Apollodoros ; for he could not himself sta}^ before the 
walls during a protracted siege. He found his instrument to 
his hand ; the man who took Kassandreia for him was one 
Ameinias of Phokis, arch-pirate. Antigonos no doubt had 
some hereclitary influence with the pirate chiefs, who had 
"IJ^eelTDemetrios' ver}^ good, friends ; and it served him well. 
Kassandreia had already' stood a lengthy siege when Ameinias 
was given a free hand. He at once opened sham negotia- 
tions with the garrison, lulled them into a sense of security 
and then made a night attack on the walls, the head of the 
storming column being formed by ten Aetolian 'pirates' 
under the command of one Melatas. The attack succeeded; 
and Antigonos became master of the great cit}^ after a siege 
of ten months.^'- 

The next step was the recovery of Thessaly, which durin g 
the tnmbles of the Gaulish invasion had shaken itself free of 
Macedonia. This must have been carried out by Antigonos 

° Diod. 22, 5, 2. 

^^ Cf. Livy 44, ii. — There seem to have been some outlying forts ; see 
At'yyos cfypovpiov KatTa-ai/SpeaiP (Apollodoros, fr. 88, Jacoby). 
" See ch. 6, n. 91. 
^2 Polyaen. 4, 6, 18. Ameinias is a good Phokian name ; Sy//.'^ 253. 




concurrently with the siege of Kassandreia b}' Ameinias ; ^^ 
fork would a ppear that by the end of th e campaigning 
season of 276 Antigonos was master of his kingdom. He 
naturally made no attempt at present to go beyond its existing 
bounds. It is not known whether the frontier provinces of 
Tymphaia and Parauaiawere still in the hands of P3Trhos, or 
whether they had been retaken by Lysimachos; but what- 
ever the positio n^ Antigono s _did_ noj^eek to alter jt, and 
he was also content for the present to acquiesce — (he may 
hardly have been in a position to do otherwisc'l —in the 
independence of Paionia. That country had regained its 
independence after the Gauls retired, but not quite in the old 
way. It had been severel}' plundered/* and Audoleon's line 
was perhaps extinct ; in any case, one Dropion reorganized 
the country as the ' League of the Paionians ', and the League 
honoured him as ' king of the Paionians and founder'.^"' On 
his coins, however, Dropion does not style himself king ; the}'' 
merely bear his initials and the legend ' of the Paionians ' : 
he sometimes restruck Lysimachos' money.^'^ The League 
would be of interest, if anything were known about it, for 
it was an experiment in the combination of the principles 
of monarchy and federalism, such as has been already noticed 
in Epeiros. That a constitution of this sort emphasises a 
cleavage from Macedonia is clear; and it ma}^ be that Paionia 
took the obvious course of drawing near to Aetolia, for 
Dropion dedicated at Delphi the head, modelled in bronze, of 
a Paionian bison. ^" 

B y t he -£ad. S)ij2:]6 it .would appear. tlia.L.Aatigo«e*-+iad 
peace, exc_ept for the persistent mo\'ement towards. freedom 
in the~Peloponncsc. One of his earliest acts, probably in 
the winter of 276 5, was to celebrate at Pella, with much 
circumstance, hisniarriage— with^^Phila. He bade come all 

'^ For the approximate date, Beloch 3, 2, 326. 

'* This seems to follow from the numerous Gallic imitations of Audoleon's 
money ; Head' 20S. 

" sy/r- 2o'6. 

''"' Head'^ p. 237. But the initials AP occur on tetradrachms of Lysimachos, 
and Head thinks that, as there is a coin in the British Museum reading 
nnoj/wi/ with the initial A (PAudoleon), the attribution to Dropion may be 

^^ Paus. 10, 13, I, ^ia-(i)vo$ ravpov. 




his friends of the old days at Eretria and Athens, and Aratos 
of Soloi wrote the marriage h3^mn in praise of the great 
god Pan, who had stood by Antigonos at Lysimacheia and 
spread his panic terror among the barbarian host. It may 
have been at this time that Antigonos instituted the games 
called Basilcia, 'the festival of kingship,' to commemorate his 
achievement of the Macedonian crown ;^- but it was the 
honours paid to Pan that were the keynote of the celebra- 
tions. He became something very like Antigonos' patron 
deity. His worship, not perhaps unknown at Pella, was now 
officially instituted there and lasted long.^^ Antigonos struck 
a new coinage of silver tetradrachms which continued to be 
issued throughout his reign, bearing the head of Pan , horned. 
\ on a Macedonian shield : he himself sat for the_ portrait of 
\ his protector, and in the features of the ArkadiarTgod","' oh 
those of the coins which show Pan's head bound with the 
royal diadem, may be recognized the only surviving likeness 
\ of the Macedonian king.-" 

^^ The marriage : fourth Hfe of Aratos. — ^The circle at Pella : ch. 8. — The 
games: /. G. ii, 1367, BacriXua iv MaKeSovia (see A. Kdrte in Rhein. Mus. 52, 
pp. 168, 175 seq.) ; analogous to those instituted by Attalos I to celebrate his 
assumption of kingship after his victory over Gauls ; O. G. I. 268. 

^^ Archelaos had commissioned Zeuxis to paint him a picture of Pan (Plin, 
N. H. 35, 36) ; and the types on coins of Pella in Roman times point to his 
being specially worshipped there, Head^ 244. The connexion of Pan with 
Antigonos was first put forward by Usener, R/iein. Mus. 1874, vol. xxix, p. 36 ; 
the conclusion with regard to Pan in this brilliant study is not invalidated 
by the fact that its main thesis cannot be sustained. 

^° Antigonos' tetradrachms : Head- 231. (To this same period may belong 
the bronze coinage with a Macedonian shield and helmet, and on the shield 
Antigonos' monogram, /V ; Head'^ 232.) Two specimens only in which Pan 
wears the diadem seem known ; one given in Imhoof-Blumer, Motinaies 
grecqiies, PI. D, n. 13 ; another, unique, at Berlin, with ^aaiXicos 'Avjiyovov 
in small letters round the head ; this is the coin figured as frontispiece to 
this book ; references in Imhoof-Blumer, op. cz'/., p. 130, 1. 3. That these are 
portraits of Antigonos, see C. T. Seltman in Num. Chron. 1909, p. 268. But 
the two heads are not very much alike, and it is difficult to say if either be 
an accurate representation of the king's features. The Berlin coin represents 
a man a good deal older than forty-three ; and as it bears the calathus, 
which J. Six considered to be the distinguishing mark of the tetradrachms of 
this series struck at Athens (see Imhoof-Blumer, op. cit., p. 130, n. 21=*; 
Ferguson, Priests, 147; J.H.S. 1910, p. 196, n. 36; and Athens, p. 184), it 
may be that it was struck at Athens soon after the end of the Chremonidean 
war. The other coin, on this theory, was not struck at Athens ; possibly 
therefore the Berlin one is the better likeness. Indeed, one might call the 
other Doson, only that the face seems too old. A study by some competent 
person of all heads on any of these tetradrachms which may bear on the 


It ma}' be well to pause here, and to take advantage of the 
peace which lasted from 276 to 274 in order to obtain some 
general view of the Macedonia of Antigonos and its relation- — 
ships to other states, and in particular to the various states of 
Greece . 

It has been strongly urged,-^ that we cannot form a true 
judgement on the inter-relationships of Greece and Mace- 
donia without first seeking from ethnology an answer to 
the question, were the Macedonians Greeks or not? For, 
according as the answer be yea or nay, so must we consider 
the Macedonian either as the organizer of Greek unity or the 
destroyer of Greek freedom. T he controversy over Mace- 
donian ethnology has been much handled of recent years -.^^ 
yet perhaps the one thing which it is safe to say on the 
subject is, that the old question will never again be asked in 
quite the old wa}'. For before we can argue whether the 
Macedonian be a Greek or no, we must first answer the 
question, what is a Greek ? And as soon as even the most 
cursory glance is given at those modern theories which make 
the bulk of the Spartan nation hellenized Illyrians,^^ or the 
bulk of the Athenian people hellenized ' Hittites',--* it is 

question is much to be desired ; some of the undiademed heads in the 
British Museum look also like portraits of a man. 

21 Beloch 3, I, I. 

" The following discussions, among others, give a good view of the 
subject. P. Kretschmer, Einleitiifii:; in die Geschichte d. griech. Sprache 
(1888), p. 284 seq. Kaerst i (1901), p. 97 seq. Beloch (1904) 3, i, p. i 
(Einleitung). M. Kiessling, Zeitsclirift fiir Ethnologie, 1905, p. 1009. 
A. Fick, Vorgriechische Ortsnainen, 1905, p. 149 seq. and passim. O. Hoff- 
mann, Die ^Iakedonen (1906). Review of Fick by F. Solmsen, B. Ph. IV. 
1906, 851. Reviews of Hoftmann by Fick, W.Ki.P/i. 1906, 1276; Beloch, 
Biii. Zeitschrift, 1908, 615 ; A. Thumb, Neiie Jahrb. f. d. klass. Altertmn, 
vol. xix, 1907, p. 76; and Kretschmer, G. G.A. 1910, 69. A. Fick, Hattiden 
uftd Dcuiubier in Grieckenland, 1909. Gawril Kazarow, P. E.G. 1910, p.243 
seq. (who cites several articles inaccessible to me).— To Beloch and Hoffmann 
the Macedonians are essentially Greeks; to Fick, Greeks over a non-Greek 
basis of population ; to Kaerst, they are related to the Greeks, with barbarian 
admixture, which also seems to be Kretschmer's view. Thumb is very 
doubtful of Hoffmann's views, and agnostic. To Kiessling and Kazarow the 
Macedonian is essentially an lllyrian, mixed with Greek and Thracian 

^' Kiessling, /. c. ; W. Ridgeway, IV/io zuere the Dorians ? (Archaeological 
Essays presented to E. B. Tylor, 1907, p. 295) ; C. H. Hawes, B.S.A. 16, 
p. 258 (from the anthropometric side). 

"* Fick, Vorgriech. Ortsnanten, p. 125 ; Hattiden, p. 5. 


evident at once that the hal.d question^ jj^:asJJie -Macedonian 
a Greek, is ah^eady meaningless. Ethnology is hardly going 
to help our verdict on the issues between the Greek and the 

When the tribe of the Makedones came down from Pindos 
and seized the Emathian plain, -^ they found the country^ 
afterwards geographically known as Macedonia, already 
peopled by a mixture of races. Anatolian aborigines had 
long since built a city at Edessa, the site of the future 
capital, and named it from their aboriginal spring-god, the 
mysterious deity Bedu, a god both of water and of air, like 
perhaps in this to the protot3'pe of the Dodonean Zeus;^" 
and several other Macedonian cities show Anatolian ngme-- 
forms.^' But these Asiatics had been overlaid by invasion 
after invasion from the North, and the country, as the Make- 
%dones found it, was e ssentially Ill3^rian and Thracian. 
^v "BiTt \vc know that conquest nas seTdom meant more than 
a change of masters, and that the lower stratum of population 
TrPany country" is remarkably persistent; and it is likely 
enough that to the end there was in the Macedonian, as in 
'the Athenian, a fair modicum of Anatohan blood. That the 

"^ Thuc. 2, 99. 

-^ Tomaschek's derivation of Edessa from /^-ie'Su has been generally accepted 
(Kretschmer, Einleitiuig^ p. 239; Hoffmann, op. cit., p. 257 ; Oberhumnier, 
Edessa in P. IV.) ; and it is in its favour that the place is still called Water- 
town {Vodcna from Slav voda, water ; see Oberhiimmer, /. <:.). But I cannot 
help feeling grave doubts : (i) there was another form of Edessa, AiSeo-o-a 
(Ptol. 3, 13, 39) ; (2) all the other compounds of ^ibv kept the /3 to Greek 
ears, e.g. Be'Si'?, BeSucnpos-, Qihvv^ias, BeSarpoy (see Kretschmer, op. cit., p. 239 ; 
Kazarow, /. c, p. 247). But it does not seem to have been noticed that 
Edessa is certainly Anatolian, like the other well-known -ss- name-forms 
on both sides of the Aegean, and therefore, if it be connected with /^e'Sn, the 
^eSu was not a Thracian god at all, but much older. This is likely enough, 
in any case. For while (iibv is said by Clement of Alexandria to be Phrygian 
for water (Kretschmer, /. f., equates it with iJficop), others are equally clear 
that it is the air (Neanthes of Kyzikos, F. H. G. iii, 9, no. 27 ; Philyllios, Kock 
I, p. 287, no. 20), both from Clement (Fick derives it from a root ve-, to blow) ; 
and it is difficult to avoid a comparison with the aboriginal spring-god of 
Dodona (see ch. 2, n. 57), who may conceivably have been a god of both 
water and air. Another case of the Thracian invaders of Macedonia adopt- 
ing an old water-god is the story of the capture of Seilenos by Midas at the 
fountain Inna on Mount Bermios ; see a vase depicting this, H. B. Walters 
xxiJ.H.S. 191 1, p. 9, where all the literature is collected. 

"^"^ 'AXi'j/Soia, MeXni/f^ia, SiVSof ; see Fick, Vorgriccli. Ortsnaiiiefi, p. 151. Add 
"Apviaa-a, Tvpiaaa, Ptol. 3, 1 3. This non-Aryan layer occurs all over Greece ; 
see, too, Wilamowitz, Staai tend Gesellschaft der Griechen, 1 910, p. 4. 


name of the old capital of Macedonia is not even Indo-European 
mere!}' brings the country into line with many of the Greek 
states ;■ for Corinth is as Asiatic a name as Tiryns, Athenai 
as foreign as Mykenai. But it is noteworthy that the name 
of the national weapon of Macedonia is apparently Asiatic 

Onj j3£,Jllvrian and Thracian tribes fell the Makedones, 
conquering, expelling, absorbing. The land was divided into 
a number of small principalities, and unity was not effected 
until far later ; and the princedoms of Upper Macedonia, 
Lynkestis, Orestis, Eleimiotis, Eordaia, and others, for some 
time retained their independence. But all b}^ degrees passed 
under Macedonian supremac}', and by Alexander's time 
absorption was going on fast ; some of his best generals 
came from Upper Macedonia;-^ and in the third century 
the men of all the outlying districts were ready to call them- 
selves Macedonians."*^ 

It is obvious that with the expansion of the dominant 
tribe, whatever its nationalit}', large Illyrian and Thracian. 
elements must have been taken up into what subsequently, 
was the Macedo nian peo ple. The Th racian elem ent shows 
itself clearl}- in the Macedonian religion. The hellenizing 
kings brought in the Olympians;"^ but these were not the 
gods of the^people. Their pantheon can still be traced; 
in Greek eyes it was essentially Thracian ; we may suspect 
that part of it, the water-worships at any rate, dates from 
before the Thracians and goes back to the Anatolian abori- 
gines. Beside Sabazios-Dionysos, we find a whole group of 
obscure deities ; Darron, the god of healing ; Thaumos or 
Thaulos, the god of war ; the Arantides, possibly his atten- 

^* 2afuaa must be from the same language as Adpiaa, and therefore Anato- 
lian. Even Hoffmann (p. 112) admits it is not Greek. 

" Krateros and Perdikkas from Orestis, Ptolemy from Eordaia ; Arr. Anab. 
6, 28, 4 ; Jnd. iS. 

^^ G.D.I. 2765 [tire. 222, Pomtow) ; grant of proxeny by Delphi <I>t\dpx«i 
EWnvluivoi Maxefioi/i 'E[X]6t//ta)T[;)i] €k Ilii^eioii. 

^^ e.g. the festival of Zeus founded by Archelaos at Dion. The worship of 
Athene Alkis or Alkidemos at Pella (Livy 42, 51) need not be very old ; the 
type does not appear regularly on Macedonian coins before Antigonos Gona- 
tas, though it occurs on a rare gold stater of Demetrios I (Svoronos \nJoi/?n. 
hitetn., vol. ii, p. 301), and was also used by Ptolemy I (Head- 848, 849), 
and by Pyrrhos (Head^ 323, fig. 184). — Cf. Arr. Anab. I, il, I. 

1476 N 



dants ; a local goddess of hunting, graecized as Artemis 
Gazoria ; a strange god of sleep, Totoes ; Bedu, the epony- 
mous god of Edessa, identified now with the air, now with 
the water ; the Sauadai or Thracian Seilenoi, old water 
spirits, afterwards made ministers of the god of wine.'^^ An 
inscription shows a Macedonian of Europos in the third 
century calhng himself by the name of his Thracian god.''" 
The Illyrian element must be traced on other lines. The 
Macedonian capital of Pella was certainly an Illyrian founda- 
tion, as its old name Bounomos shows ; and the same may 
be true of other towns also, though, except in the case of 
Pella, we know only the names which they bore in historical 

Into this land came, at a later time, the Greek. Chalkidike 
and the coast were full of his cities ; and they must have 
begun at once to exercise an hellenizing influence on Mace- 
donia, just as the Corinthian colonies did upon Epeiros. 
But on the Macedonian language their Ionic dialect pro- 
duced no effect. 

What now were the Makedones ? The question is perhaps 
insoluble. Herodotos makes them close kinsfolk of the 
Dorians ; •'•^ if then the Dorians were Ill3Tians, so were their 

^^ On this pantheon see G. Kazarow, /. c, p. 246 seq. See also, for Darron, 
Tiimpel in P. IV., s.v. ; Kazarow in K/io, 4, 116 ; Th. Reinach, Rev. Num. 
1897, p. 121, on Apollon Derronaios ; for the Arantides, Tiimpel in P. JV., 
s.v. ; for Artemis Gazoria and Totoes, P. Perdrizet, B.C.//. 1898, pp. 345, 
350 ; for the ^edv, n. 26 anfe ; for the aavddm, Kretschmer, o/>. c, pp. 195-9 ; 
Fick, //attiden, p. 47. With Thaulos compare the Thessalian Zei;? GauXios ; 
H. von Gaertringen, //ermes, 46, p. 154 ; F. Solmsen, ib. p. 286. — See Add. 

^' CD./. 2^0,^ = Syll? 917, Ma;^dTa[t] 2a/3(iTrapa EupcoTrai'coi [MjaKeSdn. 
Circ. 300 ; see P. Perdrizet, B. C.//. 1896, p. 475. He is called after Saba- 
zios. Cf. also a gravestone from Alexandria, A.D. 8, tl^ii 'Maxaoiv tov 2a/3/3(i- 
Toi'oi; KrX. ; W. Cronert '\Vi Jahresli. 1909, Beibl., p. 206. 

^^ Bounomos is connected with the Epeirot V,ovvi]xai {G.D.I. 1339, a more 
correct form than Stephanus' Boi'i/ei/xn, see Nilsson, op.c. 12), and the Illyrian 
BoCi'i'oy ; Kretschmer, p. 286 ; Fick, Vorgr. Ortsnamen, p. 85. What the 
later name of Edessa, Aigai, represents is doubtful. The usual derivation 
from (dyi^, KvnaTa (on this see Kretschmer, op.c, p. 286 ; Hoffmann, op.c, 
p. 257) is difficult to follow ; what have high waves to do with inland springs? 
The name may be related to a numerous class of Greek names, such as Aigai 
in Aeolis, and Aigina, some of which have been explained from the oak (A. B. 
Cook, C. R. 1903, p. 405 ; 1904, pp. T], 83, 86), or to Epeirot names like 
Aiyeoraioi, and Aiginion in Tymphaia (Pliny, N.//. 4, 10 (i7j ; Nilsson, 
pp. 14, 48), which may or may not be Greek. 

'" I, 56; 8,43. 



kin. But the Dorians had a vote in the Amphiktyonic Council ; 
and Hesiod affirms kinship of the Makedones with the 
Magnetes,"'' another Amphiktyonic people, a kinship that 
was an article of official belief in the third century.^'^ If then 
the Makedones were not Greeks, we must perhaps suppose 
that the Amphiktyonic League included ' barbarians ' — a 
considerable difficulty. If they were Greeks, the story of the 
admission of Alexander the Philhellen to the Ol3inpic games 
becomes, as often noted, incomprehensible. What httle his- 
torical material bears on the point has been quoted over and 
over again ; neither side can convince, and it may be noted in 
passing that much of the evidence usually cited has no value 
at all. The references to a Macedonian language "'^ are 
perfectly satisfied b)' a dialect ; no Englishman could have 
followed a speech made in broad Scotch. On the other 
hand, the argument, that the Macedonian could not be an 
Illyrian because his history is characterized by opposition to 
Ill^Tia,^^ is not valid ; no two peoples ever fought longer or 
harder than the English and the Lowland Scotch, peoples 
identical in race, language, and culture. Neither is it any 
argument that, in the time of Perseus, some Macedonian 
nobles could not speak Ill3Tian ; ■^'^ there are plent}' of High- 
land proprietors to-da}^, of unimpeachable Celtic descent, 
who can no longer speak Gaelic. Neither is it any use to 
quote lists of Macedonian towns with Greek names ; for as 
at Fella an Illyrian name was certainly exchanged for 
a Greek one, any or all of the other town names may be 
equally modern.^^ Once Greek got a footing anywhere, it 
was, like English, a conquering tongue. 

Language, in fact, gives little help. If every gloss in 
Amerias wfere sho\\'Ti ta tiFgOTTd^GreelTto-morrow, it would 
not necessarily prove more than thorough hellenization ; for 
the words cannot be dated: they cannot., pxove that the 
Makedones talked Greek to start with. Again, the fact that 
the language which the Macedonian spread throughout 

^« Fr. 23, Kinkel. 

" Syll.^ 260, 1. 3, Philip V and Magnesia on the Maeander. 
'* Including the well-known story in Curtius 6, 9, 35. They are remarkably 

" Kaerst i, p. 102. " Polyb, 28, 8, 9. ^^ See n. 34. 

N 2 


the world was Greek,'*^ and not any speech of his own, 
"^j^roves nothing be3'ond thorough hellcnization. An Irishman 
is not an Englishman because he speaks and spreads 
English. It has been argued that if any other Macedonian 
language existed the conquering Macedonians must have 
carried it overseas ; whereas all that we find is traces of 
their own Greek dialect. But if certain modern phenomena 
be considered it is seen at once that no argument can be 
drawn from this one way or the other. The Highlander has 
gone in great numbers to Canada and taken his Gaelic with 
him ; it is largely spoken in some of the eastern provinces. 
The Irishman has gone in great numbers to the United 
States and has not taken Erse with him ; he has spread the 
alien tongue. From which of these two contrary examples 
is the case of the Macedonian to be argued? 

Another argument against hellcnization has recently failed 
also. It;, could once be said that the Macedonian must be 
a Greek because his terms for everyday things were Greek. 
But the example has recentl}^ been adduced of a Romance 
language which has borrowed many of the names of common 
things from its Slav neighbours. '^■' 

But if hellcnization be the correct theory, it was an 
^' hellcnization that was, as regards language, very old. For 
Macedonian Greek is akin to Thessalian, and is not in- 
fluenced by the Ionic dialect of the cities of Chalkidike ; 
it should therefore antedate their foundation. And some of 
the Macedonian proper names go back to the sixth and fifth 
centuries ; while Hellanikos made Makedon a descendant of 

Thus far, then, there seems little against the view that the 
Makedofies were an Illyrian tribe who earl}^ learnt, frpm 
/ / their Thessalian neighbours, to speak Greek. And it must 
always be borne in mind that Macedonia differed in two most 
essential particulars from the other states of Northern 
Greece. A s. already noticed, sh e was monarchical through 

^^ On traces of the Macedonian dialect found in Egypt see P. Perdrizet, 
Rev. Et. Anc. 1908, p. 336 ; B. C.H. \g\i, p. 120. 
^^ Roumanian. See Kazaiow, R. E.G. 1910, p. 245. 
" Staph. Byz. "MaKebovia. 



and through, and was never organized as a League, at any 
rate till after Gonatas' death ;'*^ and she had no definite 
rehgious centre. But there remains one most important 
matter still to consider. If the Macedonian was a barbarian, 
he differed absolutel}' and in a most essential point from all 

"the other barbarians whom the Greeks had hitherto met, even 
from the Epeirots ; he, or at any rate his upper classes, 
possessed a quite unique capacity for hellenization. Of the 
common people we cannot speak ; we know^'nothing. But 
the nobles took greedily to Greek culture, and this fact does 
suggest that their relationship to the Greek was not that of 
Illyrian barbarians. The fact is not, it is true, conclusive for 
an}- Greek affinity; for the same phenomenon appears in 
many Romans, and may merely be due to the not uncommon 
desire of a dominant and virile race to appropriate tlie best it 
can get, in culture as in other things. But it is so marked / 

that it offl'Ts the firmest support \vc ha\'c for the theory that 

"TFieTVIakedones were Greeks ; and it ma}^ very well be that U-^- 
the'truth will ultimately be found in the theory put forward 
by Kretschmer many years ago, that had the Makedones 
turned south instead of north they would have become a good 
Greek stem, while as it was they remained in a condition of 
arrested development.^'' It is perhaps, however, tolerably safe 
to say that under the general term Macedonian, in tlie tliird 
century^ were _CQ JiLprised men of most divergent and mixed 
blood, Anatolian, Illyrian, Thracian, Greek, Macedonian 
proper, who had nevertheless made a nation, precisel}- as 
Scotland to-day includes men of every variety of descent, 
Iberian and Gael, Briton and Angle, Norseman and Norman. 
Consequently, in considering the relationship in the third 
century of Macedonia to Greece— or, to be more accurate, 
to the various Greek states, many of whom had nothing 
whatever in common — tlie less we think about blood the j 
bjett£j;Li»^Ma££donia, or so much of" it as counted, had become j 
essentiallv Greek in laniiiiau'e and culture ; it could no loni-er 

^■' Beloch (3, I, 3S8) suggested that the koii/ov Mn(f<6ora)i/ might have been 
formed in the anarchy after the death of Ptolemy Keraunos. I do not think 
this probable ; see ch. 2, n. 36. 

" Kretschmer, 0^. c, p. 288. 



.be^ classed with the barb arian. But if the Macedonian were 
tote proved a Greek to-morrow, it would not prove that the 
League of Corinth was the accomplishment of Greek unity ; 
for the material matter here is, that the Greeks refused so to 
regard it. WJialxoimted was not blood but mental attitude ; 
true union imports a common will, and this was never present. 
Macedonian interference in Greece must be taken on its 
merits, and each case considered as we should consider the 
dominion of Athens over the Islands or the interference of 
Thebes in the Peloponnese. The circle of Greek culture 
had comprised a number of jarring units, of different and 
often mixed blood. Macedonia, on entering the circle, added 
a new unit, rather more powerful, more mixed in blood. 
New permutations and combinations of the jarring units 
became possible, and duly took place ; they were no less 
ephemeral than the old had been, Macedonia was _ as far 
from unifying Greece in the fourth centur}^ as Athejis^had 
been in the fifth. 

Whatever their blood, b3'the third centur3'the Macedonians 
had acquired a strong sense of national unit}', and their 
speech and culture were Greek, They stood nearer to their 
neighbours the Thessahans than to any other Greek people ; 
their dialect, so far as known, was akin to the Thessalian.^^ 
The relationship between the two had, as we shall see, 
been translated to the field of politics. But the rustic Mace- 
donian speech was not the language of the Court ; that place 
was held by the Attic, How the common Macedonian re- 
garded the common Greek is, as usual, unknown ; it is likely 
enough that the phalangite, who had helped to conquer the 
world, affected to look down on the Greek mercenary, so 
often fated to be the mainstay of the losing side. But among 
the Macedonian upper classes there was no affectation of 
despising the Greek, as some have supposed. If they looked 
down on Eumenes personall}^, that was because Eumenes, 
while Alexander lived, had not wielded the sword but the 
pen ; we do not hear of any difficulties incurred b}' the Cretan 

" Hoffmann, o/>. c, pass/7/1. Cf. Niese l, 25. In prehistoric times there 
had been a great general resemblance in culture between Thessaly and 
Thrace ; Wace and Thompson, P/'ehistoric Thessaly, p. 250, 


Nearchos, while the Thessalian Lysimachos, after an ex- 
tremely successful career, actually became king of Mace- 
donia.*^ Alexander himself — it is true, in a rage — had said 
that Greeks among Macedonians seemed as demigods among 
beasts.*^ Antigonos' personal friends were all, as will bej 
seen. Gre eks. The Macedonians ma}^ perhaps have thoughti l/^^ 
"themselves bet ter men in the field; f urther than that wd 
certainly cannot^o. 

The Macedonian sense of nationality, morem'er-,- had be- 
come strong enough to assimilate quite definitely an}' foreign, t 
"dements. Philip II is said to have made large settlements 
of strangers in the country. Kassandros brought in 20,000 
Illyrian Autariatae, possibly refugees from the Celtic advance, 
and gave them land in Mount Orbelos. At a later time we 
hear of Gauls and Illyrians planted in the very heart of the 
country, no doubt in large part time-expired mercenaries 
settled on the land by Antigonos and his successors. But 
there is no trace of any of these becoming a source of discord 
in the countr}^'^'^ 

Upon_the_co*»ptete hellenization of Macedonia had fol- 
lowed the growth of its towns. Macedonia had originally 
been a land 6f farmers and villages,^ and -the few towns which 
existecTwere^not^cities in the Greek sense, with a municipal 
life and organization, but military strongholds/3 But by the 
fourth century the towns were becoming more populous and 
important; and, when in 382 Olynthos thought of including 
Pella and other Macedonian towns in her League,^^ we are 
perhaps to understand that they were already in some sense 
autonomous communities. It is difficult to avoid the belief 
that, in tlie thij-d_^c.entury,_Pella enjo3;ed a^cei;tai^^ of 

autonomy. How large a measure we cannot say ; but the 
men of Pclla are treated as though they were a definite body 

*^ Eiiseb. I, 233 (Schoene), BfrraXos av (k Kpavvcoros ; Syncell. in F. H. G. 
iii, 695, Aio-t^a\os- 6 efrTdXdy. His father was a Thessalian of Krannon who 
had been made a citizen of Pella ; see Beloch 3, 2, 86. Antigonos Doson 
was Thessalian on the mother's side. 

'■' Plut. Alex. 51. 

'^'' Philip; Just. 8, 6, i. Kassandros ; Diod. 20, 19, i. Gauls and Illyrians 
settled about Pella, Edessa, Beroia ; Livy 45, 30, 5 ; these may be connected 
with the Gauls and Illyrians who fought for Doson at Sellasia. 

*' Thuc. 2, 100. •'■■- Xen. Hell. 5, 2, 12-13. 



of citizens,^'' and they must at least have managed their own 
internal affairs. Most unfortunately the terms of the only 
decree known to have been passed at Pella are ambiguous ; 
and all that can be said about them is that th £^^ are consiste nt 
with the most complete autonomy.''* It may, however, be 
pointed out that the mere fact of a decree being passed at all 
in the name of the inhabitants of Pella imports a body autho- 
rized so to pass it ; for it does not bear the name of any 
governor or royal official, as does the decree of Thessalonike 
presentl}' to be mentioned,'^ and it is dated by some unknown 
priest and not by the regnal year of Antigonos.^*' Whatever 
lappHes to Pella applies also no doubt to towns like Beroia or 
Edessa.^ One thing is certain; these towns formed no en- 
:laves in tHFI^TngHmTvas^TTreeirTiEies^w^ ^ne ; 

ihe}^ were an essential part of Macedonia, and their inhabi- 
:ants described themselves indiscriminately either as men of 
5uch and such a town or as Macedonians.''^ The original 

•''■^ The Delphians, about the end of the fourth century, granted proxeny to 
the men of Pella, Mn/cf [Socti eV] n[e]\Ar;y, G. D. 1. 2759 ; and the decree of 
Pella mentioned in the next note is headed IleXAaiW. 

^^ Reply of Pella to the invitation of the Koans, circ. 253 (see ch. 1 2, p. 353), 
to declare the temple of Asklepios acrvKov ; see Arch. Anz. 1903, pp. 10, 
197 ; Ath. Mitt. 1905, p. 17S. Prof. R. Herzog kindly sent me a copy of this 
decree. There is no reference in it to demos, boule, or ekklesia, and the 
enacting words are £So|e r^t TroAf t ; one's first impression was that Pella was 
not a polls, but a king's town. In fact, however, a decree containing these 
words of enactment and no other reference to municipal organization is 
entirely consistent with the fullest self-government. 6)'//.^ 234, decree of 
Messene, third century, eSo^e Tai [ttoXi tm Mjfo-aw'coj/. Syll} 289, decree 
of Megalopolis (1S3 B. C), e6o^e rai [TrJoXei. The well-known formula of enact- 
ment in Delphian decrees, eSo^e tm ttoKh to>v AeXc^ox' ev dyopm TtXeioji crvfi 
yj/cKpois Tdis fvifofiois [Syll.- 306, 922 ; O. G. I. 241, 305, 345 ; cf. Syll.^ 925) is 
also in point ; it is sometimes abbreviated to eSo^e tcll TroXfi toiv AiXcpai', 
O. G.I. 228 (reign of Seleukos II, 246-226). — Livy 42, 53 gives no help, for 
the ' civitates Macedoniae ' there mentioned might be the admittedly auto- 
nomous Greek cities of the coast. The inscription which mentions a college 
of politarchs at Herakleia in Lynkestis would of course settle the matter, if 
there was any certainty that it antedated the Roman occupation ; see n. 99. 

^^ Michel 322 ; see notes 97 and 98. 

^^ The decree of Pella is dated by the priest Asklepiodoros and the Mace- 
donian month ; what he is priest of is not stated. In this it resembles 
Kassandros' grant, Syll." 178, e'<^' lepfus Kv8ia. The decree of Kassandreia, 
Syll.'^ 196, is dated by the priest of Lysimachos. On the other hand, the 
letter of the crown prince Demetrios to Harpalos is dated by the regnal year 
of Antigonos ; see App. 5, n. 6. 

" Compare Evpmnaiuii [Mja/ceSovi (Syll."^ giy = G. A /. 2745), with Evpw- 
7rnio[i] {G.D.I. 3286 = IG. 4, 617), both early third century, apparently; 
MaKeSoK e^ Atyfai; {Syll."^ 494, first half of third century) and MaKeSdw e^ 


Greek cities of Chalkidike and the coast were on a different 
f oQting." These cities had nothing in common with Mace- 
donia, and had in man}^ cases-been brougtit within the king- 
dom by the strong hand. But Alexander had admitted their 
people to service in his army equally with the Macedonians/^* 
and we hear nothing, save in one case, of any dislo3^alty ; 
while there are certain indications to show that they were 
fast becoming an integral part of the kingdom." 

Antigonos, then, found himself at the head of a people who, 
as far as blood went, had become a united nation. As^XQi 
garded feeling, however, there was a certain measure of the 
sprrrr*Df faction, f^yrrhos, for instance, (as the event was to 
^shcTW),' possessed a strong following in the west of the country, 
whenever he should choose to call upon it ; but this was 
probably due rather to the personality of P3Trhos than to the 
workings of Epeirot blood in the frontier provinces. It is 
possible also that one of the towns of Chalkidike, Sane, 
retained a sentiment for Kassandros' house, so long as that 
house existed. For Kassandros' half-mad brother Alexarchos, 
who thought he was the Sun, had refounded it by the name 
of Ouranopolis, ' Heaven Town ' ; he had coined a new 
speech for the people, among other absurdities, and they had 
entered into the spirit of his whim ; on their coins they call 
themselves, not 'men of Ouranopolis', but 'Children of 
Heaven '.'" 

Aiyfiav {G.D.I. 2806, early third century) with ['AraXaJfraZot and «| 'ESfV- 
(Tdj {I.G. 4, 617, above) ; MnKf[8o(Tt (k.\ n[€]\X7;y (see n. 53) with YliWaiu^v 
(ib.) and rifXXalos- {G. D. I. 2581 = Syll? 268, 1. 104, early second century) ; 
^ Wi^avhpnv Mi'XX[€ov MnKeSdra] iK Bepot'ny (/. (/'. ii, 5, 2, 261 i, end of fourth 
century or later) with "Ao-arS^oy (a name either Macedonian, P. W, s.v., or 
Thessalian, 'E0. 'Apx- 191 1, p. 123 seq.) Memv^ipov Btpoimos (.Sj//.^ 848 = 
G. I). 1. 2071, early second century). 

^^ P. Perdrizet, B. C. //. 1897, p. loS. 

'•* For instance, a man from Arethousa is willin.^,' to be called a Macedonian, 
G.D.I. 2762, '.'\]/j€^ov(r[ta)i MaJvefifJ/'t ; SO too a solitary instance of a man 
from Amphipolis, G. D. I. 2764, M(jKf6[()]w e*| 'A/j[(/j]i7roXfa)y (both end of 
fourth century; usually 'ApcjnnoXiTrji). The same thing, of course, appears 
elsewhere ; e.g. a man of Naupaktos could be called Nuvkuktios, AtVcoXoy (k 
NfivTra/fTov, or AtVwXdy simply ; S_y//.- 240, 248, 249, and see Dittenberger on 
240, n. 3. 

'"'" Strabo 7 fr. 35 ; Pliny, N. II. 4, 10 (17); specimens of the language, 
Herakleides Lemljos ap. y\then. 3, 98 E. The coins ; B. M. Coins, Maccdon, 
xxxii ; Head ^ 206. The persistent types confirm the tradition that Alexarchos, 
like Demetrios, was the Sun ; Clement, Protrept. 54, axnov Kariaxr]p.aTi^iv els 


But the most important element of discord was the great 
city-of Kassandreia^ which could hardly become on a sudden 
an extravagant]}' lo3'al town. It had worshipped Lysimachos 
as a god/'^ and had been for a while independent of Mace- 
donia, first under Lysimachos' widow Arsinoe, and then 
under Eurydike, mother of Keraunos, a prince who posed 
as Lysimachos' avenger and successor; and Lysimachos' 
heir still lived. Since then it had had a career of its own, 
powerful if unhappy, under Apollodoros, and had stood a long 
siege from Antigonos. It could hardly regard itself at once 
merely as an integral_j;a_rt of, Macedonia. It contrasted 
strongly In this wTtTT'its near neighbour Thessalonike, Kas- 
sandros' other great foundation, formed like itself of the 
inhabitants of various Greek cities. The tendency of two 
powerful and adjacent cities to take opposite sides in politics 
is well known ; and Thessalonike was lo3^al to Antigonos 
and the kingdom. The subject is obscure ; but it can hardly 
be an accident that, while Antigonid rule lasted, men of 
Thessalonike frequently, men of Kassandreia apparently 
never, called themselves Macedonians.*^^ 

Here then were two sources of difficult}^ in Antigonos' 
position ; a widespread S3mpath3' with P3Trhos, and disaffec- 

"HXtop. His people were the stars. Dr. Head has called attention to the 
remarkable fact that the coins give, not OvpavoKoXiTaf, but Ovpavidav or 
Ovpavi8S>v TToXfo)?. 

" 5)'//. 2 196. 

®- The result of a search, not as complete as I could have wished, for the 
Macedonian period, i.e. before 168, is as follows. For Kassandreia: four- 
teen cases of Kaaaai'Spevi (or Kaaa-avdpeiris or (k Kaa-cravSpdas) and four of 
Knaaavdpfii ; none showing MaKfBav. One is instructive, 'E<^. 'Ap;^. 1905, 
169, a stele giving AvKmovlKai, which gives two men with the ethnic Majceficbj/ 
and then one en KnaaavSpelas alone, showing that it is no accident. For 
Thessalonike : out of seven cases, three of QeaaakoviKevs alone (/. G. vii, 
320; /. G. xii, 8, part 2, 581 ; B. C.N. 1910, p. 367, no. 15) ; two of MaKeBovi 
eK GeiTaaXoviKi][s] {Syll." 494 bis) ; and two, most instructive, of MafcfSwr 
alone ; one is the well-known Admetos, son of Bokros (Michel 3S9), who was 
a citizen of Thessalonike (Michel 322) ; the other is on a third-century epitaph 
from Thessalonike, Aioy(vr]s 'HpaKXtidov Mn<(8a,v (I. G. ix, 2, 367). (The proxeny 
decree, G. D. I. 2767, with QeaaaKoviKfl MaKehovi seems to be later than 168.) 
• — Thessalonike was a synoikismos of some twenty-six Greek communities ; 
Strabo 7, frs. 21 and 24. Its loyalty : Antigonos took refuge there after his 
defeat by Pyrrhos, Just. 25, 3, 7 ; and, when the Antigonids were again 
suzerains of the Cyclades, Thessalonike seems to have been their usual 
channel of communication with Delos ; see the decrees concerning Admetos, 
son of Bokros (above), and the Delian decree for Aristoboulos of Thessa- 
lonike, <TiTiovr]i of Demetrios H, B. C. H. 1910, p. 367, no. 15. 






tiorij actual or potential, in his greatest city. Other local 
disaffection there must also ha\t' been, with so many pre- 
tenders recently in the field. And, apart from this, the 
kingdom had developed certain weaknesses of its own. There 
was a heavy decrease in the population, at an}' rate in that 
part of it capable of bearing arms ; and the most serious 
aspect of this was the wasting of the old landed aristocracy, 
w hose n umbers had been, brought down both b}' two genera- 
tions of ceaseless war, in which they had officered the armies 
of two continents, and b}' the settlement of a certain number 
of them in Asia and Egypt. One consequence of this was 
that Antigonos and his successors had not sufficient tneaof 
their own race for the numerous oftices, civil and militar} 
which required filling, and were compelled to some extent 
to fall back on Greeks, who were necessar^.}':. often adven- / 
turers, and who as such were sometimes conspicuous rather/', 
fqr cl evernes s tha n for jjiore Jiecessarv qualities, Antigoiio^ 
himself seems to have been well served ; but at a later time ' 
treacher}' was not unknown.''^ 

Another source of weakness must have been t he JJnances.J ^:* 
IMaccdonia had been well plundered, and Antigonos had 
brought with him but an empt\' cash-box. To what extent 
he ma}' have lightened the tribute formerly paid b}- the Greek 
dependencies, first to Demetrios®^ and then to himself, is not 
known ; but it must have been done to some extent in such 
possessions as remained after the revolt of 280. Macedonia, 
when in working order, could provide a fair yearl}- revenue, 
though not a great one ; in Perseus' time it was only some- 
thing over 200 talents.'^'' The countr}?^ paid a land tax, and 
the kings possessed the extensive remnants of the old state 
domains; and the harbour and customs duties counted for 
something, for, (though she can hardly have required man}''"* 
imports), Macedonia was in a position to export timber on 
a considerable scale",'^ as well as other requisites for ship^" 

■"'^ Livy 27, 32, 9 ; 28, 6. 

'''* See especially Beloch t,, i, 344-6, and references. There seems no in- 
formation special to Gonatas' reign to be got. 

" For Demetrios' taxes sec ch. 5, n. 4, and ch. 3, n. 15. 

«" Plut. Ai-m. 28, 4. 

^ Sy//.'^ jj and notes ; /. G. xi, 199 A, 1. 57 ; Theophr. C/iar. 23. 



building, such as pitch. A moderate sum could also be 
derived from the silver workings on Mount Pangaios and the 
mines of iron and lead which the countr}' possessed ; but the 
chief source of the income enjo3^ed by Philip II had failed.'^'* 
^ Ihe un at deposit of alluvial gold which had served Philip 
so well was worked out, and"none other had been discovered ; 
no gold to speak of now came from the district about Philippoi, 
and^Antigonos never struck a gold coin. The Antigonid 
kings never had the possibility of amassing a treasure, like 
their brothers of S3Tia and Eg^-pt ; even the long peace 
between 197 and 168 onl}^ enabled a comparatively modest 
saving to be made, and the 6,000 talents which Aemilius 
Paulus found in the treasury after Pydna were all that re- 
mained over and above the by no means large sum spent by 
y^i Perseus on the war. In a £ei^n that began under such 
/|' difficulties as did that of Gonatas, the ever present problem 
j at first must have been to balance revenue and expenditure.' 
^ The country, however, was essentially sound ; it po>-e>sed 
good cornland and forests, and a capable population, who in 
time of war could turn their hands to an3^thing.'''^ It only 
required a few 3'ears of rest and good government to be again 
^ on a stable and moderately prosperous basis. 

None of these sources of weakness would have mattered 
very greatly had Antigonos been sure of the support of the 
common Macedonian, the sturdy farmer wlio sensed" in the 
phalanx and formed the backbone of the country : all that 
would then have been wanted was time and patience and 
good government. But this support was exactly what Anti- 
gonos was not sure of; and he knew it. He excited as yet 
no enthusiasm in Macedonia; to many of his subjects his 
philosophic training and tastes must have made him seem 
strange, as one who was too much of a foreigner ; he had to 
^ bear the burden of the sins of his father Demetrios, and 
\ probably of his uncle Kassandros, even if he still derived 
some small advantage from being the grandson of Antipatros.'" 

^- P. Perdrizet, Klio, 1910, pp. i, 25-7, throws much new light on the 
Pangaios mines. — Iron and lead, Polyb. 5, 89, 6 and 7. — Generally, Livy 
45, 18. 

f Polyb. 5, 2, 5. 

'° Cf. Plut. Dem. 2)1- Kassandros' unpopularity, ch. 4, p. 89. 



He had no reserve nf . pQpulaaiUy to draw on ; and the fact 
was soon to be as patent to the world as it was to himself, 

T^nYjA'eakness in the position of the king of course reacted 
on the State, for in Macedonia, far more than in most countries, 
the king and the State were identical. There was no dis- 
tinction between the king's pmy purse and the State revenue. 
He had indeed his council, the ' Friends ' whose privilege it 
was to be about his person both in peace and war;''^ but 
they were advisers onl}^, and they had no independent power, 
or at most judicial functions. What little_£o\yer existed in 
the country outside the king resided, not in the nobility, but 
in the army, that is to sa}^, in the Macedonian people under 
arms. They had certain obscure rights of judging in trials 
for ti'eason,'^ perhaps on the ground that the king, being in 
effect a party, could not be judge himself. And they had 
one moment of real power, when it fell to them to elect, or 
to confirm, a new king. When the throne was empt}', their 
election was valid ; they had the crown in their hands to 
give ;'^^.>^'ithout their election no king could be. It used to 
be a fashion with some historians to call all the Successors 
usurpers.'"* Whatever the case as regards Syria or Egypt, 
the phrase as applied to the Antigonid kings of Macedonia is 
a mere absurdit}'. The old royal house of the Argeadai was 
extinct; and the crown was legally in the hands of the III yt 
Macedonian people under arms, to confer upon whomsoever llj "^ 
they would. Antigonos was every bit as much a legitimate <^' 
national king as was Alexander. 

One nb'^riirp aspect of the identity of th e king nnr| fhf — ■ 

■" Beloch 3, I, 389 ; Kaerst i, 126. 

''^ Kaerst l, 129. — Beloch (3, i, 3S6) thinks that they had tlie regular 
criminal jurisdiction, and that the king could not put Macedonians to death 
without their consent. This is what Curtius says, 6, 8, 25. But Curtius is 
wretched authority. Of the known cases, two (those of Perdikkas' adherents, 
Diod. 18, 37, Plut. lu/w. 8, and of Olympias, Diod. 19, 51) are not only 
treason cases but belong to a time when there was no hand which could 
exercise effectively the king's powers. In the third case, that of Leontios, 
Polyb. 5, 27, 5, the peltasts under his command claim to be consulted if it be 
a case of treason, but if it be a question about a bail they do not so claim, 
they merely say they will raise the money. 

"^ This question is exhaustively treated in the papers by Lehmann-Haupt 
and Reuss mentioned ch. 5, n. 39. See also Beloch 3, I, 385. 

~* e.g. Holm and Freeman. 


_State is provided by the land ([iiL'slion. The nobihty were 
great landowners, but on wliat terms is not known, except 
that all did in fact serve in the army; while the relationship 
between the king and the common Macedonian of Macedonia 
proper is; lost in antiquity. The latter is always treated as 
a free man, and probably owned his own farm, though 
evidence is lacking. '^Qienational Macedonian constitution 
has been called feudal, on the ground that the subordinate 
princes in Alexander's army led their own followings ; '^ but 
neither this, nor the general obligation to mihtary service, 
are any proof that Macedonia proper was on a feudal basis, 
i. e.that each man had a superior (in an ascending chain), of 
whom he held, and to whom his service was due. Rather, 
Av it seems that the service of the common Macedonian was 
h^ue direct to the king. That every free Macedonian did 
' serve may be taken for granted ; for the army was the people 
under arms, and an incident such as the caUing out of old 
men and boys by Philip V shows that every man of military 
age was out already. If this be correct, the comparatively 
small arrriies which Macedonia could furnish may give some 
idea of the scanty population of the country which had con- 
quered half the world. And the constant caUing out of the 
men must have meant bad farming and a smaller food- 
production ; this again would tend to keep down the popula- 
tion, a tendency perhaps counteracted in part by the oppor- 
tunities offered to the Macedonian in other lands. 

But outside Macedonia proper the relation of the king to 
Ihe soil is more easily visible. The special method in which 
the Macedonian kings, like their brothers of Egypt and Asia, 
developed military service was by means of the KXrjpo? or 
' lot '.^'^ Greek civilization knew four methods of acquiring 
land, by inheritance, purchase, conquest, or gift from a 

''^ Wilamowitz, S/aa/ und Gesellschaft der Gricchefi, 1910, p. 139. 

''^ See, on the Macedonian system, the grants made by Kassandros, Syll.^ 
178 ; the same inscription, /./. G. 2, 116, 134; M. Rostowzew, Studien zur 
Geschichte des romischen Kolotiates, 1910, p, 251 seq. ; W. H. Buckler and 
D. M. Robinson, Amer. Journ. Arch., vol. xvi, 1912, p. 11, on a very impor- 
tant new inscription from Sardis for Seleukid practice, especially p. 22. — The 
Ptolemaic system is treated at length by Rostowzew ; see also Bouche- 
Leclercq 3, 231 seq. — ' Allotment ' is too technical to serve as a translation 
of KXtjpos, 


superior ; '^ and the lot illustrated the two latter. The land » /^ 
owned by the Macedonian kings had been acquired b} ^ con- 
quest. All co nquered territory passed t o the king-: tor rn'e"' 
king \va_s the State. The royal domains in Macedonia proper 
were but the remains^ of a far more extensive ' spear-won 
territory', once possibly coterminous with Macedonia itself; 
but the working of the S3^stem can be seen most clearly in 
the lands recentl}^ conquered by Philip II, the lands of the 
Greek cities of Chalkidike and the coast. We seem to get 
no distinction here, as in Asia, between the land of the cit^^ 
and the land of the king ; ^thejcit^^land^jar thp hulk,- 
^elonged to the king,. and he granted it in lots to whom he 
would, the Crown retaining certain rights.'^ T he tenure o n 
which the Macedonian kings gave out these lots was a tenure 
of inheritance, under which the lot passed to the heir,"'^ It 
is immaterial whether we call this tenure a perpetual lease 
or a grant, for if both are burdened with the same payments 
there ceases to be an}' distinction, save in terminology ; but 
as * lease ' in Enghsh alwa^'S imports certain elements which 
are absent from the lot, it is preferable to treat the lot as the 
grant of a limited proprietorship.^'^ 'TTcn^'aBlyTt^'aV^^ 
inalienable ; -^ and the king retained a valuable estate in the 
land, the right of escheat on failure of heirs. The king also 
received payment from the klerouchos or grantee of the lot, 
in the shape of various taxes and duties ;^^'^TTartliey were 

" Syll? 929, 1. 133. 

'* Syll? 178 ; the lots are city land, but are granted by the king; they had 
therefore become king's land by conquest (cf. Rostowzew, p. 252). They are 
not to become city land again after the grant, as was the case when the 
Seleukids made a grant of king's land out-and-out {O.G.I. 221 and 225); 
therefore they were not granted out-and-out, but the king retained some 
estate in them. — See Addenda. 

" Sjli.- 178, (SoVis) ()j. TraTinKu'ii, Presumably the same as fiia-daa-is els to 

*° See Bouche-Leclercq 3, 321, n. i. The use of the word Kvpiois in Sj'//.'^ 
178 seems to show that the terminology of a grant of proprietorship is the 
more apt. Rostowzew, p. 252, treats the tenure as Erbpacht. 

*" This is only a deduction of my own. But an express grant of powers of 
sale and exchange over kXjjpoi. {Sj'//."^ 178) imports the necessity of such a 
grant before any sale or exchange can be made ; i.e. imports some inalien- 
able KXijpoi. A case of an estate inalienable for twenty years (Michel 199 = 
CD. I. 1634) is cited, /./. G. 2, 135. 

*^ Polyb. 36, 17, 13 mentions 0opot generally. Obviously there was a 
<f)6pos, from the necessities of the case and the analogy of the lots in Egypt and 


cannot be exactly stated, nor is it known if the burdens on 
the Macedonian lot resembled the formidable list of pa^mients 
that fell on the Egyptian lot- owner ; probably they were far 
lighter.^^ One other right the king may have had ; no doubt 
the klerouchos, unless time-expired, held his lot on terms 
of rendering military service, and, on the analogy of the 
Eg3'ptian practice, it would seem that the king might re- 
enter and declaretHe Fot forfeit" if this obligation were 

It seems that klerouchoi were also established in Mace- 
donia proper; Gauls and Illyrians were settled in Emathia,^^ 
and they must have received lots out of the royal domains. 
The object of their settlement was doubtless military service ; 
but as they are expressly referred to as hardworking cultiva- 
tors, we are perhaps to understand that their lots were 
originally uncultivated land, held under that form of lease of 
which one of the conditions was that the lessee should bring 
the ground into cultivation, the form afterwards known as 
emphyteusis.^*^ Large parts, however, of the ro3'al domains 
remained in the king's own hand, and were cultivated by 

^To secure military service, inalienabilit}^ of the lot was an 
obvious measure ; such ma}' have been the original idea. 
But at the time we are dealing with the lots known to us are 
alienable. In England, such inalienable estates as exist have 
been given by the nation as a reward for public services ; it 
looks in Macedonia as if alienabilit}^ came in when the lot 
was given as a reward for past service rather than as a security 

Asia (see Buckler and Robinson, /. c, pp. 52-4). Syll} 178 grants a release 
from import and export duties on articles for the klerouchos' own use. 

'^^ See the list for Egypt in Bouche-Leclercq 3, 233-6. If Macedonian 
land had been as heavily burdened, the kings must have become far 
wealthier than they ever were. Polyb. 36, 17, 13, the Romans freed the 
Macedonians from iiovnpx^Koiv i-mTay^aTUiv kch (pnpoiv, is too general to be of 
much assistance. 

** For Egypt, Bouche-Leclercq 3, 233, n. 5. 

*° Livy 45, 30, in the third regio ; ' incolas quoque permultos Gallos et 
lllyrios, impigros cultores.' To be distinguished from the settlement of a 
whole people or tribe, like the Vettii mentioned just before. See n. 50. 

""^ See Dar.-Sagl.^ s.v. ; J. J.G. 1, p. 201 ; for Egypt, Rostowzew, p. 80. 

" I agree with Droysen, Hel/enisintis^, iii, i, 90, that this must be the mean- 
ing of Livy 45, 18, 'locationes praediorum rusticorum.' 


for service in the future.'^^ In the case of the ahenable lot 
the klerouchos is expressed to have absolute powers of 
possession, sale, and exchange. ^^ In Asia he could also mort- 
gage, by way of a sale subject to redemption ; ^" this power 
has not yet been expressly noted in Macedonia. On the 
supposition that, at the same time, the lot could be left b}'^ 
will,^^ it had now come to differ in one respect only from the 
English fee simple (allowing for the differences in the arrange- 
ment and incidence of taxation), that is to say, in the power 
of the king (if it existed) to re-enter for refusal to serve ; and ] 
rh~a~country as warlike and as patriotic as Macedonia the | 
exefctse' of such a power can have rarely been needed. 
Once the lot was freely alienable, the king's right of escheat 
became of as little practical value as the similar right still 
vested in the Crown over most of the land in England ; but 
it served in theory to mnrk the f^ct '•'•'q'" i-Kt^. -l£^wj^iL-c±iLl Iring'Q 
land and_jiot_city_lajid.^'^ There is no evidence that thei 
Macedonian kings ever made grants out-and-out, as did the! 
Seleukids, grants under which the land granted ceased to be! 
king's land at all, and had to be joined to the territory of 
some city.''^ 

There was probably no national standing army at this time. 
The only permanent corps, besides the numerous Greek 
mercenaries in garrison, seem to have been the horse; 
gjjajxls, of unknown strength, and the f oot-guards, the agema, 
who in later reigns had a fixed establishment of 2,000 men ;^* 

^* I do not mean that there was a time when no alienable lots existed. The 
development is notional rather than temporal. 

'*'■' Syi/.^ 178, Kvpioii oucri KfKTrjadai Koi dWdirafadai Koi dnoSoadiu , 

'■'" The before-cited inscription, Aiiier. Journ. Arch. 191 2, p. 11, relates to 
a mortgage in the form Trpdcrty eVi Xi'trfi. 

■'' 'i'his is hypothetical. It has been much argued over the Egyptian 

"'■^ Rostowzew (p. 252 I believes that on a change of dynasty, or even of 
rulers, the king had the right to take back to himself every lot in Macedonia. 
One would need better evidence than 5y//.^ 178 for an arrangement that 
would have destroyed half the value of the ,\&)pa ^iktiXikti at once ; I agree 
with the editors of/./. U. that the klerouchoi of Sj//.- 17S took grants from 
Kassandros 'ex maiore cautela '. What is conceivable is that it was 
customary for a new king to confirm titles on payment by the klerouchos 
of a fine. 

"^ O. Li. I. 221, 225. 

** Polyb. ^, 67, 6; Livy 42, 51; see Beloch 3, I, 353. I think that 

147B O 



Gauls were probably enlisted as required. The Macedonian 
army itself had come back'TO xrhere il Stnd the Roman army 
alike began, a levy of farmers called out when a serious 
campaig n was expect ed. The professional long-service 
golHiers who had grown up under Philip and Alexander 
were either dead or settled on the land in Asia, Egypt, or " 
elsewhere; and they were not replaced. Practically all 

^^^rrison and oversea work at this time must have been per- 
formed by mercenaries, unless the forts on the northern 
frontier were an exception ; even at the end of the century 
only the most important Macedonian garrisons, such as that 
of Cori nth, had a scant}' stiffening of home-bred troops. It 
will be s cen^ time and again, how loath Antigonos was to 

1 call out the Macedonians or to use them when called out ; 
^ th ere, were., none . ta . waste. 

The court of an Antigonid king presents no aspects of 
mterest, and need not detain us. It has the regular features 
of an}- other court of the time, though perhaps less elaborate 
than the Eg3'ptian. We meet with the little group of privi- 
leged officers who constituted the king's personal bod}'- 
guard ; the corps of 3-ouths of good family — the so-called 
royal pages — which formed a nursery for the higher officers 
of the army ; the boys who were selected to be ' foster- 
brothers ' of the young heir to the crown. The titles of two 
high officials are also known, the captain of the guard and 
the king's secretar3^ The former commanded the royal 
pages, and was responsible for the arrangements necessary 
to secure the king's safety. The latter conducted the king's 
correspondence, which involved (since the king was the 
State) the drafting of all decrees ; since he wrote always in 
the king's name and not his own, he must, practically^ have 
y^ achieved the coveted position ofpo\vel'Witliotrtrespon"si'biTity.^^ 
/^/^^he arrangements made b}^ Antigonos for the actuaT" 
goyerriinent of his empire are of more importance. The 

Polybios implies that the horse-guards were more than 400 strong ; Philip 
took 400 of them. 

^^ See Beloch 3, i, 389-94, on Hellenistic courts generally. Add to his 
references for criofMTo(pv\aKfs those of Philip V, Livy 40, 6 and 8. - — For the 
power of the secretary (6 fVi tov ypa/j/xareiov, Polyb. 4, Sj), cf. that of 
the secretary ' ab epistulis ' in the early Roman Empire. 



original kingdom of Macedonia probably remained in the 
personal hands of the king; but all acquired territory was 
governed through strategoi or generals, possessing military -^f^jc 
power. We find under Gonatas a strategos of the Piraeus 
and the districts that were ranged with the Piraeus, Mouny- 
chia, Sounion, Salarais ; in some later reign Euboea was 
divided between more than one strategos ; under Philip V 
there was a strategos of Paionia. Ujid£i:JC»«»*fea9-,-'ttre most 
important strategia was that bestowed on his half-brother 
Krateros, who governed Corinth and Euboea, and had a 
general supervision of the affairs of Greece south of Attica ; 
he was perhaps rather a viceroy than a mere strategos. He 
had, however, no control over the strategos of Piraeus, who 
was independently responsible to the king.'^*^ 

The next office in importance to that of strategos was that 
of e pistate s, the governor of a town or district appointed 
directly b}^ the king ; he was a kind of administrator-general 
with very wide powers. There were epistatai in Macedonia _ 

and Thessaly; probably in Thessaly they governed the J 

important towns. The epistates, however, in hellenistic ^du^"— 
kingdoms generally, is always connected with a subject district ; 
and it is difficult to believe that any were ever appointed in 
Macedonia proper. No doubt _t he_xeference, .to., epistatai of 
Macedonia means those over Greek towns of the coast. In 
any case, we see the system of epistatai applied in the two 
countries outside Macedonia proper which the king ruled as 
lawful ruler, the system of strategoi in the lands held merel}' 
by right of recent conquest. The two systems seem not to 

*" HoUeaiix, 7?. /:. (7. lo, 446, thought that the whole of Macedonia and 
its vassal states was divided into military districts and governed by strategoi ; 
Beloch 3, 1,404 contra, only 'die makedonischen Nebenliinder '. There is 
no evidence so far for strategoi in Macedonia proper. — Strategoi. Of 
Piraeus Kal rcof liWoyv rutv TaTToiitpcov fxfra tov llfipaiiws, I. G. li, 5) 59^ ^ 
= 5///.'' 220 ; these at a later time include Mounychia, Sounion, and Salamis, 
Diog. L. 4, 39; Plut. Arat. 34. Of Euboea: 'E</). 'Apx^. 1887, p. 81, no. 2 
= 1895, P- 163. Of Paionia: Livy 40, 21 and 23; 42, 58. The phrase 
'ex praetoribus regiis unus qui Paeoniae praeerat' points to a regular system 
of strategoi. Krateros : Plut. Mot: 486 A, (npaTi)yuv ; his general super- 
vision, ib. 219 A, 253 a; the rest of the paragraph is a deduction from the 
known facts about Krateros' son Alexander. — lieloch also gives a strategos 
of Phokis under Philip V and Perseus, and of Dolopia under Perseus ; the 
evidence for these seems insufficient. 

O 2 




Jie-part at a whole but to run parallel. In one province, 
however— Chalkidike — it is possible that the two were 
worked together; for while we shall see reason to suppose 
that there was a strategos of Chalkidike, the great coast towns 
were certainly governed by epistatai. It may have been part 
\|of a reasoned policy, due to the enormous importance of 
holding the coast towns to the king's interest : its logical basis 
could be found in the fact that these towns had once been 
conquered, but were now an integral part of the Macedonia 
of a Macedonian king. To govern these towns as dependen- 
cies and garrison them was a strong measure, but one that was 
to justify itself absolutely in the near future. The S3'stem 
lasted to the Roman conquest.^" 

Details are available for one town only, Thessal onike^ 
Thessalonike was an autonomous cit}^ of Greek blood, with 
the usual constitutional forms, a boule and an ekklesia ; but 
it was governed for the king by an epistates or governor, a 
deputy-governor, and a board of five harmosts or subordinates 
of some kind; and at the head of a decree of the people of 
. jThessalonike are found the names of the deput3'-governor 
JvJand the harmosts. What degree of control they exercised 
over the meetings of the people is not apparent. The fact 
that the name of the governor himself is absent may suggest 
that he was responsible for several cities, with a deputy in 

There are in existence a number of interesting inscriptions 
referring to a college of politarchs in several Macedonian 
cities,'Thessalonike, Amphipolis, Herakleia in Lynkestis. It 
is, however, unfortunately impossible to feel any certainty 
that any of these are prae-Roman ; most of them certainly 

^'' On the fnKTTaTtjs in Hellenistic kingdoms, Holleaux in B. C. H. 1893, 
pp. 52-60. He differed little from the fTri/xeXTjTiji employed by Kassandros 
and Demetrios ; both terms are applied to Demetrios of Phaleron (Diod. 19, 
78, 3 ; 20, 45, 2), but see a good discussion of eVi/^eXr/njf in Ferguson, ^///^«^, 
p. 47, n. 3. The articles under both headings in Dar.-Sagl. and P. W. 
hardly notice the usage as a Macedonian governor. — ema-roTaL in Macedonia 
and Thessaly, Polyb. 5, 26, 5. — In the coast towns, Michel 322, with 
Holleaux' commentarj', 7?. E. G. 1897, p. 446 seq. —At Amphipolis under 
Perseus, Livy 44, 44 ('qui praeerat urbi '). The 'praefecti praesidiorum ' of 
Livy are more probably cppovpnpxm. — See Addenda. 

*** Michel 389 and 322, with Holleaux in /i. E. G. 1897, p. 446 ; inrfniaTUTrjs 
and five harmosts at Thessalonike. 


belong to the period after the Roman occupation, when a new 
S3'stem may have been established. They therefore do not 
call for notice here.'^ 

None of the cities of Macedonia possessed the right of 
coining, not even fcissandreia or Thessalonike ; and Greek 
towns as a rule lost the right when incorporated in the 
kingdom. Ouranopolis, an exception in this as in much else, 
had indeed struck her own coinage under Kassandros ; but it 
may be doubted whether this was not now a thing of the past, 
a mere episode connected with Alexarchos' rule there. In 
all Antigonos ' empire, it appears, the only two cities that 
still coined for themselves were Athens and Corinth ; and, 
apart from historical sentiment, and from the deslrabilit}- of 
doin^^very thing possible 191? 5'efp TtTFS'ef two great c6mmuni-t 

. ties_contented, there was a definite reason for this in the wide- ! 
spread use which the well-known money of each town served 

Tn the wo rld's commerce. The coinage of the Antigonid 
kings themselves issued from their royal mints in Philippoi, 
Amphipolis, and elsewhere ; Antigonos, too, coined in Deme- 
trias, and, after the Chremonidean war, in Athens. Athens 
lost her own right of coining at the same time ; but Corinth 
continued to strike her Pegasos staters till lost to Antigonos 
in 243.^"' 

One very interesting question of organization is raised by 
Antigonos'Tiaiife-cities, of which mention ma}' be made here, 
though it involves considerable anticipation of events. So 
far as is known, he founded three ; an Antigoneia on the 
mainland of Chalkidike near Kassandreia, another in Paionia, 
a third in Atintania. The first was probably founded soon 

'^ Demilsas, 17 M(/«8owa, nos. 364 to 369. These politarchs, who some- 
times appear together with a Ta/xias t^j jioXews, were apparently in addition 
to the boule and ekklesia. P. Perdrizet has maintained that this arrange- 
ment dated froni after 168 (/). C. H. 1894, p. 416 ; 1897, pp. 116, 161) ; contra 
Hoileaux (/?, E.G. 1897, p. 446), who would regard politarchs as third 
century, on the strength of the decree of Heraklcia in Lynkestis, Demitsas 
368 = B. C.II. 1897, p. 161, and who is followed by Wilamowitz, Staat uttd 
Gesellschaft d. Griec/ieu, p. 141. I think clearer evidence is needed before 
any system of politarchs can be treated as existing prior to 168. 

^^ Athens: ch. 10, n. 104. Corinth: Head'- 403, Ouranopolis: n. 60. 
Mints: G. Macdonald, Huntcrian Collection^ i, 275,281. — Possibly some of 
Antigonos' tetradrachms that commemorated Kos were struck at Demetrias, 
from the monogram; Imhoof-lilumer, Monnaies grecqucs, p. 127. 


after the capture of Kassandreia, for its pur.pnse„J5._obvious ; 
it was to keep watch on the disaffected great cit ^^, and wa s no~ 
doubt settled with Antigonos' own partisans, time-expu'ed 
mercenaries and others on whom he could rely. Though it 
never became a rival to Kassandreia, it did become a place of 
importance, and at a later time was strongly garrisoned. The 
other two name-cities were of course founded much later, 
after Antigonos had acquired the two provinces in question.'"^ 

A whole series. of c ities, founded in the king's own name, 
and never, h 'kf ^ the— Selenkid foundations, m the names of 

fathers, suggests a more famous parallel. ^Alexander had 

Foulfded in Asia a numbeFof name-cities, and his planin so 
doing can be conjectured. As he advanced into Asia and left 
behmd him the old traditional seats of government, he began 
to found an Alexandria in each province of Darius' empire ; 
each was probably intended to be the seat of the satrap of the 
province. The plan was carried out so thoroughly that in 
Bactria, where there was a famous royal city, it was renamed.^"' 
Alexander, however, had a very clear conception of something 
which we ma}' call his 'sphere'; he did not mean to extend 
his system beyond the bounds of Darius' empire ; hence not 
only was his name-cit}' on the Jaxartes, where Persian rule 
had always ended, called ' The last of the Alexandrias \^^'' but 
when he did definitely overpass Darius' boundary and enter 
the Punjab, he founded no more name-cities or satrapies, but 
set up a system of protected native kings. 

Now Antigonos, as will presently be seen, had just as sharp 

a cbH(!!fep)tl6n of his ' sphere ' asTTaH' ATHa'n3er7Trrd~outsiHF'S 

i. e. in the Pdoponnese, he ultimately adopted a similar 

jj^ystem to that of Alexander, protected native ' t3'rants ' ; and 

it is at least probable that in the foundation of his name-cities 

Vhe was consciously- imitating Alexander, and that each was 
meant to be the seat of the strategos of a province. The 

^"^ Antigoneia in Chalkidike ; Skymnos 621 {G.G.M. i, p. 221); Livy 
44, 10, cf. 42, 58 ; it was fairly near Kassandreia. For the other two see 
ch. II, notes 4 and 21. 

'"" The Alexandria-name of Bactra is preserved in Chinese sources in the 
corrupted form Lan-chi ; Specht, /f ?/;■«. Asiat., ser. 8, vol. 2, p. 321 ; sen 9, 
vol, 10, pp. 159-61. 

^^' Alexandreschate. 


three cities known were founded in ttiree outlying provinces 
that, once Macedonian, had had to be reconquered ; the out- 
lying provinces were ruled by strategoi; and it seems very 
difficult to avoid drawing the inference that here we have, on 
the analog}' of the Alexandrias, the seats of the strategoi of n 
Chalkidike, Paionia, and Atintania respectivel3^ 

A question that must have arisen early for decision was 
thatoF the capital. Aigai had been the old capital of the 
"Argeadai. The capital of Philip and Alexander had been 
Pella. Both Kassandros and Demetrios had built themselves 
new cities ; and, whether Pella remained the nominal capital 
or not, Kassandros seems to have treated Kassandreia, where 
his worship was instituted,^-* as his own seat, Lysimachos, 
and after him Arsinoe, may have done the same.^"' Demetrios 
may have meant Demetrias for his personal capital, though it 
is not very clear. But the actual centre of power, as was 
natural in the then state of the world, had steadil}' shifted 

Antigjt ^os wis e ly refrained from bui lding himself yet another 
capital^andj2iade"Pella again the acfiSt i^eUL Uf Uo^dllUlieill." 
It is possible, too, that from Pella had come the family of the_ 
old^A ntigonos.''"" To have built a new great city, after the 
common fashion of the Successors, would have meant an 
expenditure of time, energ}', and money, which could ill have 
been spared ; it would have run counter to, instead of foster-l 1 
ing, the national pride of the Macedonians ; and at best in \ 
could onl}' have produced a cit}' of the second class. Another! 1 
Kassandreia might have been possible; another Alexandria! r\ 
or Antioch was not, for the simple reason that Antigonos' \ 1 
sphere already included one of the great cities of the world. \ 
And even though Athens, in the nature of the case, could \l 
not be his official capital, the attraction which she still 
exercised on every form of greatness must have prevented 
the formation of any real rival. 

Pella, indeed, on its fresh-water lake, possessed distinct 

^'^ Sy//r 178 ; if Kydias was priest of Kassandros. 

'"* Lysimachos worshipped at Kassandreia, Sy//.'^ 196. On Arsinoe's rule 
there for her own and Lysimachos' son see ch. 5, pp. 130, 134. 

'"' This would depend on his rather enigmatical relationship to Marsyas of 
I'ella ; see IJcloch 3, 2, S9. 


disadvantages. It was notoriously unhealthy,'"^ and it was 
situated too far to the north to be a convenient centre for 
overlooking the affairs of Greece. Antigonos is, naturally, 
often found at Demetrias or Athens. But Pella, where his 
marriage had been celebrated, and the worship of Pan 
officially instituted, was the reaLand not -merely-the -official 
capital, both oL Antigonos and of all his dynasty; and 
Antigonos had emphasized his return to the national centre 
of the kingdom by abandoning his father's Poseidon upon 
his tetradrachms and substituting for the god of the lost 
seas the goddess of the most famous temple in Pella, Athene 
j Alkis or Alkidemos. And if Pella lay far to the north, that 
\ had its advantages also. F or Antigono s. by entrusting the 
affairs of Greece to Krateros, gained leisure to attend to 
Mace donta l iimself ; and Pella was a convenient centre from 
which to carr}' out and maintain his measures for the defence 
ofTTs northern frontier against the barbarian./ For the 
northern frontier was constantly threatened with invasion : 
not only by secular enemies like the southern lUyrians, or 
the Thracian Maedi, but also b}'' Gauhsh tribes, who per- 
petually tended to overflow southward from the Danube 
valley, and one of whose peoples, the Scordisci, was already 
firmly established in Servia, while others had formed the 
kingdom of Tylis in the interior of Thrace. But most 
dafl ge rous of -al4- wera-4li€-Dardania»Sy -an-HI-yriatt-stciLck who 
held the country about the upper Axios and part of what is 
now Roumania, where they had enslaved the original in- 
habitants. Brave, barbarous, and dirty — they washed, ran 
the proverb, but thrice in a lifetime, at birth, marriage, and 
death— they could put into the field a large force of heavy- 
armed men, accompanied, after the Spartan fashion, by a 
host of armed slaves ; and the Dardanian court became the 
refuge of every enemy of the. Macedonian crownT"^^ " 

"' Athen. 8, 332 a. 

^"^ Maedi : their habitual incursions, Livy 26, 25, 7 (a strong passage), 28, 
5,7- — Scordisci: C. Jullian, Nt'sL de la Gatile, i, 302; and see ch. 6, 
n. 69. — Dardani : customs, Strab. 7, 316; slaves, Agathark. ap. Athen. 6, 
272 d (some had over 1,000); heavy-armed, Livy 31, 43. See generally 
Patsch in P. IV., s.7'. The origin of the proverb rpii toO /3tov Xe'Xourat coanfp 
Aap6ai/fvs is explained by Fick, Hattiden, p. 34. 






The measures for the defence of the North must have const(-fl .j^>-<^ 
^uted far the most important of all Antigonos' acts. Naturally^ 
the wretched fragments of the tradition scarcel}' contain a 
hint of them ; but it is known that they were successfully 
c arried t h rough/lVlacedonia was'rtot ttg-ain serronsl}'' in^'aded 
from the north for nearl}- fift}' years, when the conquests of 
the Bastarnae drove the Dardanians south ^"- to a war t-haii.- 
ended in the death of Demetrios II, and precipitated the 
crisis that called Doson to the throne, a crisis not, however, 
for a moment comparable with that of 279. We may con- 
jecture that among other things a system of fortified posts' 
was introduced, exactl}^ as Aetolia after the Gallic invasion 
was covered with hill-forts to prevent the repetition of an}^ 
such catastrophe.'^'^ But in addition to this, Antigonos, like 
every one of his successors — Demetrios II, Doson, Philip V, 
Perseus — must have been perpetuall}' fighting on the 
northern frontier, though in his case the record is lost. The 
ba rriers could on lv be kept up b}' the strong hand ; and\ \ 
Antigonos can hardl}' have escaped the common lot of his 
dynast}', to be recalled time after time to the northern 
frontier, leaving other undertakings half finished;"^ while 
the necessity of keeping up a proper system of frontier 
defence deprived him, as it deprived ever}' Macedonian 
king, of a considerable part of his effective strength in the 

But the Antigonid kings had their reward ; and man}' must 
have realized the abilit}' with^ which- Antigonos had_handled 
the barbarians and secured the safet}' of the CQuntries under 
his rule^whgn the}' looked across the sea t'> Asia Minor, |\ 

'*" Trog. Pro/. 28. See ch. 12, p. 365. 

"'' The Aetolian hill-forts : Sotcriades, 'E(^. 'Apx- 1900, p. 170. The same 
may be conjectured for Macedonia from the number of forts mentioned in 
the wars with Rome. e.g. Livy 31, 27. 

'" Demetrios II fell in battle with the Dardani ; Doson had to leave the 
Peloponnese prematurely and hurry back to meet an Illyrian invasion and 
his death; the fuller record of Philip V shows constant wars with Illyrians, 
Dardanians, and Maedi, culminating in a scheme (Livy 40, 57) to destroy 
the Dardani altogether by means of the Bastarnae ; Perseus had to spend 
the autumn of the tirst year of his war with Rome campaigning in Illyria 
(Livy 43, 18-20). There is perhaps an allusion to a lost campaign of 
Gonatas in the North in Athen. 8, 340 f ; for Antagoras was only with him 
between 276 and 274, and no other lighting at that time is known. 

^ ^ stlT 


and saw the great towns there humbly paying tribute with 
both hands ; blackmail to the Galatians in return for im- 
munit}' from plunder, and war taxes to Antiochos to enable 
him to bridle those same Galatians, who all the time — so 
rumour whispered — were blackmailing Antiochos himself."^ 
rom 277 to 168 Macedonia, under the Antigonids, was the 
stiteid and bulwark of Greece, preserving Greek civilization' 
from the possibility of being swamped by northern barbarism 
before it s w ork was done, before it bad 3^et taught Rome and 
through Rome the whole modern world; Macedonia and 
her kings stood in the gap till Rome was ready ^and able, 
with greater resources, to take up the work. This is the 
Text of the paneg^Tic on Macedonia which Polybios of Me- 
galopolis has put into the mouth of the Akarnanian Lykiskos ; 
if Aetolia deserved thanks for saving Greece ojice, what do 

rthe Macedonian kings deserve, seeing that they spend nearly 
[he whole of their lives in fighting barbarians to ensure the 
safety of Hellas? This is the argument with which the 
Roman conqueror of Philip V cut short the savagery of his 
Aetolian allies, when they clamoured for the abolition of the 
Macedonian kingdom; without Macedonia, Gjigefce. would 
lie under the heel of th'e'TKracian, the lll^Tian, and the 
"Gaul. Republican Rome herself, when her time came, hardly 
"and with many failures kept out the northerners ; the Anti- 
gonids on the whole managed it with success. This is the 
,real importance of the Antigonid dynast}^ in history: to this 
jwork Greek historian and Roman conqueror have alike paid 
their tributCy^ 

The atteinpt must now be made to ascertain what Antigonos 
considep^ his ' sphere ', as a necessary preliminary to any 
treatment of his relations with other states, both at this time 
and later. He had very clear-cut ideas as to which parts of 
the world concerned him and which did not, ideas not of 
course recorded in the fragments of the tradition, but trans- 

"2 Sj'/r- 210 ; O. G. I. 223, 1. 28 ; Livy 38, 16, 13. 

113 Yox Polybios see 9, 28 39, where he gives first a denunciation of 
Macedonia by the mouth of the Aetolian Chlaineas, and then (32 seq.) 
a defence of Macedonia as the bulwark {npocfypnynn) of Greece by the mouth 
of the Akarnanian Lykiskos. I quote here freely from 35. I shall come to 
Chlaineas in ch. 10. — Flamininus' words ; Polyb. 18, ^7, 9 = Livy ;i;^, 12, 10. 


lated with unmistakable clearness into action at different 
periods of his life. The sweeping assertion of a modern 
historian, that ' the aim of the Antigonid kings was to reduce 
as large a portion of Greece as possible ',"* is, as regards 
Gonatas, peculiarly ill-founded even for a sweeping assertion ; 
the facts go so very far in the opposite direction. It may be 
well, therefore, to state very briefly how the case does really 
seem to stand ; the remainder of this history will either prove ' 
or disprove what is here stated. 

Antigonos was, and meant to be, a Macedonian king of 
Macedonians ; nothing more, but that fully, with all that it 
implied. It implied that Macedonia was to be ruled in her 
own interest, and made a stable state again on her own 
foundations ; and it also implied that matters must be so 
ordered, if possible, as to prevent Macedonia being deprived 
of, or imperilled in, her place as a great Power ; her standing 
must not be threatened. Various consequences followed 
from this. One was that Macedonia proper must some day- 
be restored to her most extended boundaries. Hence districts 
which had once been Macedonian, such as Paionia (now 
independent), or Atintania (now in the hands of Pyrrhos), 
fell within the sphere. A second was that the days of Asiatic 
adventure w^ere absolutely at an end. Antigonos was on 
excellent terms now with Antiochos his brother-in-law; the 
good understanding between the two was to take its place 
for many years as one of the stable factors of current politics. 
The two empires did not clash at any point ; and Macedonian 
interests ended with the Thracian frontier. Save in one 
matter of a guardianship,^^^ a purely personal affair, it is not 
recorded that Antigonos had anything to do with Asia 

A third was, that the policy of Demetrios in Greece was 
reversed. Demetrios had definitely sought a preponderance 
of power over all the other states of the peninsula ; Anti- 
gonos sought nothing of the kind. Demetrios had had ideas 
of world-rule ; Antigonos wished to be a national king in 
his own country, Demetrios had thrust Macedonia into the 

'" Freeman, Federal Governiiicnt, p. 179 (ed. Bury). 

'" Of the children of Nikomedes of Bithynia, Memnon 22. 



background of his policy, and had toyed with sentimental 
phil-Hellenism ; now the king of Macedonia was to put the 
interests of Macedonia before those of Greece. It had been, 
no doubt, a generous aspiration on the part of Alexander and 
Demetrios to desire to be head of a league of Greek states, 
to be a Greek as well as a Macedonian king; but, after all, 
this policy had been a complete failure, and Antigonos, as 
king of the Macedonians, can hardly be blamed for reverting, 
in the interests of his own people, to a policy which he had 
some chance of carr3'ing through. 

Save for two reasons, Antigonos might have left Greece 
alone altogether. The first was the danger to Macedonia. 
Rightl}^ or wrongl}', he thought that the security of Mace- 
donia demanded that Greece must not unite, either of herself 
or under the hegemony of Egypt ; and this conditioned all 
Antigonos' dealings with Greece. The central point of the 
situation was Corinth ; that great fortress was to be held, at 
whatever cost. It had already proved its enormous value ; 
it was to do so again and again. But if it was to be held, it 
could not be left in the air. Antigonos ruled Thessal}', to 
which he probably considered his title as legal as to Mace- 
donia; but Aetolia and Boeotia cut land communication 
between Demetrias and Corinth, and Egypt ruled the sea. 
It was necessar}^, therefore, to hold Euboea as an alternative 
route.^^*' He who held Chalkis held Euboea ; so Chalkis 
had become of necessit}' a great fortress, second only to 
Corinth : and both were in one hand, that of Krateros, so 
that the strategos of Corinth might also control the necessary 
communications northward. Antigonos was fortunate in his 
governor ; for Krateros' loyalty was undoubted, and indeed 
the good relations of the two brothers became proverbial.^^" 
So far, then, as Corinth went, this was all that was at present 
necessary or possible ; no more possessions in Greece were 
needed or desired ; but at a later period it was found neces- 
sary to secure the communications of Corinth with Attica by 
conquering the Megarid. 

The second reason was the sentimental, or spiritual, value 

1"= Polyb. 2, 52, 7. 1" Plut. Mor. 486 A. 



of Athens, a matter none the less real and important because 
intangible. Antigonos must have looked on Athens as his 
intellectual capital ; certainl}'' he could not allow any other 
power to dominate the city, or even acquire preponderating 
influence there. It was for this reason that he held Piraeus. 
Piraeus was as vital to him as Chalkis, but for quite another 
reason ; and as it was held for the sake of Athens and not 
for the sake of Corinth, it was therefore (as has been seen) 
not put under Krateros but under a separate strategos. The 
strategos at this time was Hierokles of Karia, a man who 
had already proved his loyalty in a subordinate position. ^^^ 

Outside these limits, Greece was free and independent. 
It is true that Antigonos in 276 still held a few small places 
in the Peloponnese ; but these were merely a survival of his 
one-time Greek ' kingdom ', and as they broke off one by one 
he made small effort to retain them. He had already lost 
Troizen without a struggle ; in 275 he lost three of the 
remaining Achaean towns, Aigion, Boura, Keryneia."^ The 
remaining three were probably lost in the war with Pyrrhos ; 
if he continued to hold one or two small places in Arkadia 
or the Argolid, that is the most that he did ; and there is 
no evidence that he did even this. Now that he had the 
revenues of Macedonia he no longer depended on taxes 
from Greek cities ; while his proceedings after Pyrrhos' 
death seem to show that he understood that the conquest 
and garrisoning of this or that city state, which in the nature 
of things his empire could not assimilate, was a source not 
of strength but of weakness. Peloponnese south of Corinth 
formed no part of his sphere, and he had no more intention 
of setting upstrategoi there than Alexander had of instituting 
satraps in India. '-'^ 

It will be seen then that, Thessaly excepted, the relations 
of Antigonos with Greece hinge on two absolutely uncon- 

**' Hierokles is called toj ti)v Uowvxiuv e^oirt Ka\ tw Ileipaia (Diog. L. 
4, 39) and tov f'nl mv UeifmiMt (ib. 2, 127). There can be no doubt he was 
strategos; and the time of the latter reference is fixed by Menedemos' exile 
to c'/rc. 273-272. — For his earlier services see ch. 4, p. 104. 

"" Polyb. 2, 41, 13-15. Cf. Beloch 3, 2, 306. 

'■" This is a noteworthy point in Antigonos' policy ; for Kassandros /uu/ 
had a strategos of the Peloponnese, Uiod. 19, 64. 


nected points — Corinth for the sake of safety, Athens for 
the sake of culture. It may be as well now to indicate 
briefly the position of Macedonia with regard to the several 
states individually. 

Thessaly had for long been essentially a part of Macedonia, 
and it may be that (as language suggests) the Macedonian 
was recognized as being nearer of kin to the Thessalian than 
to other Greeks. It had had an ancient League of its own, 
grouped round the federal cult of Athene Itonia, and under 
the headship of a sort of military dictator, the tagos ; Pelo- 
pidas had reorganized the League on the Boeotian model, 
under an archon, and though Philip II had cut the League 
into four, he had had to end, in 344, by restoring its unity.^-' 
Save for various assertions of independence — in the Lamian 
war, for instance, and during the Gallic invasion — the country 
had, since Philip, remained a Macedonian possession ; but 
the Macedonian kings looked on it as occupying a peculiar 
position towards themselves, and considered that its loss 
would be, not as the loss of any other Greek possession, but 
almost as the loss of part of Macedonia."^ Thessalian cities, 
moreover, officially dated by the regnal years of the Mace- 
donian kings.^--^ The best explanation of these facts, and 
also of the separate hsts of the Macedonian kings as 'kings 
of Thessaly', which appear in the annahsts, is that the 
Macedonian king Jiad a legal position in Thessaly, and that 
he was the official head of the Thessalian League, occupying 
(but occupying for life) the position held by the old tagos 
and by the later federal archon, perhaps with the peculiar 
control over the troops of the state which the tagos had 
exercised.^-* It agrees with this that the Macedonian kings 
took into their own hands the celebration of the national 
Magnesian festival, the Hetairideia, traditionally founded by 

^2' On the old League, H. Francotte, La Polisgrecque, 1 75 seq. ; G. Fougeres, 
art. KQivov in Dar.-Sagl. — The restoration of the League's unity by Philip 1 1 
depends solely upon /. G. ii, 184 = SylK^ 159, but this suffices. 

i''^ Livy 32, 10, 7. 

^^^ Decree of Krannon, G. D, I. 361 A. 

^2* Monceaux in Rev. Arch. 1888, i, p. 221 ; Fougeres /. c. ; Kaerst I, 182. 
This explains why the list of the kings of Thessaly is succeeded without 
a break by that of the strategoi of the later league. 


Jason.'-^ Ijllbis way the efifective soyereignt}' of Macedonia 
was reconciled with the continued existence of the Thessahan_ 
League: the autonomous government of the country re- 
rnained in name, but was hable in practice to be overridden, jj 
Forms apart, the ThessaTian differed nothing from the Mace- 
"cToman : both ahke did the bidding of the Macedonian king/^" 
The Thessahans can hardly have exercised any free choice 
in the appointment of Macedonian kings as presidents of 
their League ; but no doubt all forms were observed. Jha_^ 
country, however, was at present a source of weakness to 
Antigonos. He had probably been compelled to reconquer 
rr~By "tlie sword. The Thessalian nobilit}' had not played 
a very glorious part in the events of Brennus' invasion ; and 
many of them must have been correspondingly sore, not 
merely because they had done a discreditable thing which 
had failed, but also because they found themselves under 
a king whose title of honour was derived from the defeat of 
Brennus' compatriots. We do in fact hear of irreconcil- 
ables, like that Theodoros of Larisa, a water-drinker, and 
therefore (in the eyes of the then world), a peculiar if not 
dangerous person, who remained a consistent opponent of 
Antigonos all his life.^-"^ It is doubtful if Larisa ever became 
contented with Macedonian rule ; '-^ and certainly Thessal}^ ■ 
was to take the first opportunity of revolting against Anti- ^ 

With the affairs of Northern Greece Antigonos did not-/ C 
atternTpltTo'ThYerfei^er'" He sought as little to acquire influence 
as to conquer.' Phokis, Lokris, Doris, might remain as inde- 
pendent as Aetolia or Epeiros for all that it concerned him. 
Even with Boeotia, for which his father had fought so hard 


'" Hegesand. ap. Athen. 13, 572 d. See Hoffmann, o/>.i'., p. 93. 

"* Polyb. 4, 76, 2. — Larisa under Philip V ^as still governed by rayol, 
whether or not a Macedonian f'ma-TiiTtjs was added ; Syll.'^ 239. 

''^'^ Phylarch. ap. Athen. 2, 44 b. The common opinion about water- 
drinkers is shown by some one troubhng to compile a list of them (Athen. 2, 
44 b-f, and by Philemon upon Zeno (Diog. L. 7, 27) (f)i\o(jo(f)iav Kai.i>i]v yap 

ovTOi (f)i\n(rn(f}fl . . . eninulu vdaip. 

"* Larisa was disaffected under Philip V ; Svi/.'^ 239. It had always been 
markedly anti-Macedonian ; see Thrasymachos vnep twv Aapto-niwi^ (ap, 
Clem. Alex. Siro>n. 6, 624 c), who makes them say 'A^x*^"'? bovkfvofxfv 
"EXXt;)'£J ovTfi ^ap^iipu. 


md which he had once held himself, he did not seek to 
revise relations : jt remained a bsolu tely independent. Even 
had he desired to reconquer Boeotia — a thing of which no 
trace whatever remains— he could not at present have 
attempted it; there was far too much to do in Macedonia in 
the way of organization. Some participation in the affairs 
of the North could, however, hardly be avoided; for he was 
still bound to Pyrrhos by the secret treaty, and he was more- 
over in possession of a kingdom of which part had actually 
been in PjTrhos' hands. If and when Pyrrhos should return, 
the position might become acute ; but till then Antigonos 
had nothing to fear from Epeiros. The affairs of the North, 
at this time, reall}^ resolved themselves into his relationship 
ivith Aetolia. 

^JLbi, Lvuntib uf 279 had giveft-^filolia^^ sense of new 
national life and new ambitions. She had stood forward as 
the champion of Greece ; she had done deeds which poets 
yet unborn were to sing of to her children's children. ^^^ 
Henceforth she began to dream of a career of greatness. 
She was in fact the one state in Greece that was able 
throughout all her history to stand absolutely alone, in 
complete independence of both Egypt and Macedonia ; she 
steered her own course. She already knew the lines on 
which she w^ould work ; she meant to operate by means of 
the control of Delphi and of the Amphikt3'0nic League. 

Aetolia has been damned for ever in the pages of Polybios, 
But, in considering Aetolian policy at this time, we shall 
make a great mistake if we do not dissociate our minds from 
matters that belong to niite a later epoch. So far, Aetolia 
seems to have had only one recorded bad deed to her 
credit ; ^■^*' few Greek states could boast of less. She was to 
commit others before Gonatas died ; but this was not 3'et. 
She had succeeded in 304 in mediating between Demetrios 
and Rhodes ; and her control of Delphi, for a time at least, 
was to be entirely honourable to both parties. Delphi, 
fallen on evil days since the oracle had medised in the 

1" /. G. ix, 2, 62 = Michel 296 = G. D. 1. 1440. 

^^^ In 314 she had received the surrender of Agrinion on terms of sparing 
the Hves of the inhabitants, and had then slain them ; Diod. 19, 68, I. 




fifth century, was to be quickened to new vitality and 
authorit3\ She was to play a large and prominent part in 
that growing movement which led to so many well-known 
temples in Greece becoming the scene of an increasing 
number of manumissions of slaves.^"^ It had ahva^'s been her 
tradition to use her influence for the purpose of humanizing 
war ;^^^ but now Delphi and Aetolia between them were to 
bring about what was almost a new thing in the world. 
With the Aetolian domination over Delphi begins that 
most astonishing third-century achievement, the creation oi 

numerous fresh ' asylums^ ^''■' or centres ot peace, under 

'^' On the way in which the number of manumissions began to go up in 
the Macedonian epoch, see A. Calderini, La inanoinisdone e la condizione 
dei liberti in Grecia, 1908, ch. 5. 

^^'^ For cases in the sixth and fifth centuries see C. Philippson, Ititer- 
national Laiu and Custom of Ancient Greece and Rome, 2, p. 219. 

'^^ They were not of course unknown before the third century ; see e.g. 
such cases as Alalkomenai in Boeotia, Strab. 9, 413 ; Kalauria, whose amiXia 
was preserved by the Macedonian kings, Strab. 8, 374 ; and cf. the various 
religious truces. A fifth-century treaty (between Oiantheia and Chalaion, 
Michel 3) also exists which restricted the right of reprisal, vvka. — As the 
subject is important, I give a list of ' asyla ' in whose formation Delphi or 
Aetolia played a leading part. 

(i) First half of third century. Temple of Poseidon and Amphitrite on 
Tenos, erected between 278-261 (perhaps circ. 270/69, Graindor in Musee 
Beige, 191 1, p. 254) ; built in response to a Delphic oracle, Tac. Ann. 3, 63 ; 
decree of the League of the Phokians declaring both temple and island 
ivTvKa (/. G. ix, I, 97 ; see /. G. xii, 5, 2, p. xvi, n. 1314), no doubt in response 
to a lead given by Delphi, as the Phokian decree was to be set up there. 
Possible fragment of the Aetolian decree declaring both temple and island 
iinvKa ; P. Graindor in Musee Beige, 14 (1910), p. 43, no. 22, enlarging /. G. 
xii, 5, 857. See /. G. xii, 5, 867, 868. 

(ii) Circ. 252. Decree of the Aetolians, that Delos is to be safe from them 
and the cities of their League. See ch. 12, n. 32. 

(iii) Circ. 242-238. Temple of Aphrodite Stratonikis at Smyrna, built in 
response to a Delphic oracle (Tac. Ann. 37-^3), was declared (ariAoj/ and 
Smyrna itself Upa Ka\ aavXas. Seleukos 11, in getting the necessary consents, 
was obeying a Delphic oracle ; and the Delphic decree of aa-vXui remains ; 
O. G. I. 228, see also O. G. I. 229, 1. 12. 

(iv) Same for Miletos and the temple of Apollo at Didyma, possibly 
a little earlier than (iii) ; R. Herzog; Sitziingsb. d. k. Breuss. Akad. d. IViss. 
1905, p. 979 (decree of Miletos). 

(v) 221/20. City and territory of Magnesia on the Maeander, following on 
the epiphany of the goddess Artemis Leukophryene : SylL' 256 to 261 ; 
Michel 1495 (the Athenian response). The recognition as I'fpa Km na-vXoi 
was in pursuance of a Delphic oracle to that effect ; the Aetolian decree 
confirming it for their part is SyB-' 923. Note that the response of Ithaka 
speaks, not of a Delphic oracle, as the Athenian response does, but /ca^wr 6 
\\Tr6\\<i)v 6 (V At\(}if>'is dvif fxocrfv {Syll} 257) !• I?)* 

(vi) Between 205 and 203 ; Alabanda (Antioch tov to)v Xfivaaopioiv tOvovi) 

147B p 


the shield of the Delphian Apollo, temples or towns or 
territory declared inviolable and placed outside the ravages 
of war by the formal consent of as many civilized states 
as could be obtained. If the Aetolians were traditionally 
a nation of robbers, at least they used their power over 
Apollo to exempt, in Apollo's name, city after city from their 
depredations. Aetolia was, no doubt, on probation ; to 
become a great power, she must be on her good behaviour. 
But there is no reason whatever to suppose that, at this time, 
her good behaviour was not entirely genuine. 

The Aetolian control of Delphi did not become absolute at 
once. For instance, it is not known whether, as yet, she kept 
a governor in the town, as she certainly did later ; ^"* and it 
is known that at this time she was not yet using Delphi as the 
repository of her archives, which were still kept at Thermos.^"^ 
In process of time she w^as to have all her decrees set up in 
duplicate at Thermos and at Delphi, as a matter of course /-"^ 
and her authority over Delphi became so absolute that she 
not only kept a governor there, but could and did pass 

and its territory rendered aa-vXos and lepd ; decree of the Amphiktyons, 
O. G. I, 234- 

(vii) Circ. 203 ; city and territory of Teos rendered Upa Ka\ aavXos. Decrees 
of Delphi (Michel 67), of the Aetohans (ib. 68 = 5)'//.' 280), and of various 
Cretan communities, Michel 52-66. Unedited decree for two envoys from 
Teos, Pomtow, P. IV., Delphoi, 2631. — This aavK'ia is remarkable as having 
been recognized by a decree of the Roman senate ; Syll.'^ 279, Michel 51. 

(viii) End of third or beginning of second century ; temple of Apollo 
Ptoios at Akraiphia. Amphiktyonic decree making it atruXoy, Syll? 557 ; 
a copy of the decree was to be kept at Delphi, and the hieromnemones were 
to see that it was brought to the notice of all cities and peoples. 

(ix) Same period ; Kyzikos. Decree of Delphi making the city tepn, 
B.C.H. 4, 1880, p. 473. 

(x) 0;r. 179-172. Temenos of Athene Nikephoros at Pergamon; decree 
of the Aetolians, at the request of Eumenes II, making it HktvKov tIi ott' 
AtTCoXwi^ Kai Tcov (V AiTcoXiai KaTOiKeovrav, SyllP' 2g^ — G. D. I. I4I3' 

No doubt, when all the documents are published, it will appear that the 
flcruXin of the temple of Asklepios at Kos, <7>t. 250, falls in the same category. 
— Of the above, nos. (iii) and (v) to (ix) are mentioned by Hiller von Gaer- 
tringen, Delphoi in /'. W., cols. 2570, 2571. 

'^* Aetolian governor of Delphi, ci7C. 224-200, G. D. I. 2672 ; KaTauTa6i\s 
i'lTo T(ov AiToiXoii' (7TI fi(\r]Tai Tov T€ Jep[o{} Kn\ ray 7ro]X[t]o9. 

^^^ Treaty between Aetolia and Akarnania ('E(^. 'Apx- iQOSi P- 55)) '^"''^• 
276-273 : the Aetolians are to set it up at Thermos, the Akarnanians at 
Aktion, and the two jointly at Olympia, Delphi, and Dodona. 

'^^ Syll."^ 923 (between 216 and 205) ; /. G. ix, 2, 205 = 6>//.- 425 = Michel 
22 = G.D.I. 141 5 (shortly before 200); Syll.'^ 2g^ — G.D.J. 1413 (circ. 179- 
172); G.D.I. 1412 (date uncertain). 


decrees of her own regulating the internal affairs of the 
city.^^' It does not appear that Delphi ever became a 
member of the Aetolian League ; but it is noteworthy that, in 
•freeing a slave, a citizen of Delphi would often date by the 
Aetolian strategos as well as by his own archon.^'*^ It may 
be worth noticing that the movement for making ' asylums ' 
grows in force as the Aetolian control of Delphi becomes 
more complete. 

Politically, the ambition of Aetolia was clear-cut. Delphi 
was the centre of the Amphiktyonic League, and Aetolia 
meant to control that League. Philip II had shown how the 
control of this religious body could be made a considerable 
instrument of temporal power ; Aetolia meant that his mantle,^ 
should "fall upon herself and notupon Afitigonos of Mace; 
donia, and that she should be the League's sword. The 
Amphiktyonic states were to be her sphere ; she looked 
forward to the day when she should include them all in her 
own polity, and make the Aetolian League coterminous with 
the Amphikt3'onic. It was a polic}' that offered considerable 
scope ; Amphiktyonic decrees could be made to assume a 
very different importance in the world with Aetolia as execu- 
tive. In fact, very shortly after the repulse of the Gauls, the 
Amphiktyons were already claiming to impose their decrees 
upon states that were no parties to them ; ^^^ and at no 
distant date cities that had been fined by the Amphiktyons 
found it to their profit to apply for remission, not to the 
Amphiktyons, but to the Aetolians direct.^^*^ In the _end, |^ 
Aetolia did get complete control of the Amphiktyonic League, ' 
though the fiction of its independence was still maintained.^^^ 
But it was a policy which, when first entered on, seemed 
bound to bring Aetolia into coUision with Antigonos. 

In 285 Aetolia, as the friend of Pyrrhos, had become the 
friend of Antigonos also. But in 276 she can have felt little ' 
gqadwill toward the king whose Celtic victory had deprived 

'" Sjy//.^ 485 = G. v./. 1409. 

13X yq^ references see Uittenberger, note 3 to Sy//.'^ 485. 
"' /. Cr. ii, 55i = Cr'. A /. 2506. See Niese ii, 221. 
"« 5y//.2 250. 

"^ Polyb. 4, 25, 8 ; this was in 220, when the Aetolians controlled fourteen 
of the twenty-four votes ; see Beloch 3, 2, 350. 

P 2 



her own exploits of some of their lustre ; and she must have 
seen that, when Pyrrhos returned, a conflict between him and 
Antigonos would be inevitable, and she would have to choose 
her side. When the t ime came, both her traditional friend- 
ship for Pyrrhos and her traditional policy of supporting the 
second state against the first were to incline her, definitely if 
not heartil}-, to the side of the Epeirot king. But in 276 
the future was uncertain, and in view of eventualities she 
strengthened herself by that alliance with Akarnania — a 
country traditionally friendly to Macedonia — which has 
already been referred to,^*^ and which gave her the call 
of the Akarnanian levies should necessity arise. But this 
was a matter apart from the question of the Amphikt3^onic 

Aetolia's control of Delphi already gave her a strong 
position Tn this respect ; she held the Amphikt^^onic meeting- 
place. Either now or later, too, she so managed that the 
secretary of the Amphikt3^onic League was always an 
Aetolian.^'^" But for the time being she did not control 
many votes ; in this respect Antigonos had the advantageof 
her. Of the 24 votes, the Macedonian king controlled 7, 
namely those of the Thessalians (2), the Magnetes (2), the 
Achaeans of Phthiotis (2), and the Perrhaibians (i) ; all these 
peoples were included in Macedonian Thessal}^ Aetolia was 
not even an Amphiktyonic state ; she had originally no votes 
of her own. But neither had Philip II. At the moment 
Aetolia owned two votes only ; the incorporation of Western 
Lokris in her League had given her one of the Lokrian votes, 
the incorporation of Herakleia one of the Malian. But four 
votes had been ownerless. These w^ere the votes originally 
of Phokis (2), Perrhaibia (t), and the Dolopes (i), which had 
been taken from them by Philip II after the Sacred War, 
leaving Phokis disfranchised and the Perrhaibians and 
Dolopes with but one vote apiece. Philip II had caused two 
of these votes to be given to Delphi, and two to himself as 
his personal possession ; Alexander in some way acquired the 
two Delphic votes, and thus had four of his own, which, how- 
ever, he seems to have exercised through Delphic citizens. 
"- See ch. 5, n. 20. '" G. D. /., vol, 2, p. 672. 


These four votes never passed to Macedonia ; they became the 
personal possession of Alexander's heirs ; and with the death 
of Alexander's son they fell into abeyance. What happened 
to them in the interval is unknown. But the Amphiktyons at 
some time or other— it can hardly have been before Aetolia 
controlled Delphi — gave two of these votes back to the 
Delphians ; and after the events of 279 Phokis was rewarded 
for her bravery against the Celts by the restoration to her of 
the other two votes.^*^ It is impossible not to see the hand of 
Aetolia in all this. Aetolia earned the gratitude of Phokis by 
restoring her to the position of which she had been deprived, 
the gratitude of Delphi by restoring her to the position in 
which she had been placed, by a Macedonian king ; and as 
Aetolia controlled Delphi, the Delphic votes would of course 
be cast as she directed. But as Aetolia had no power in the 
matter, and must have relied upon persuasion and the 
glamour of her victories, we see — it can be seen also in other 
ways— that at this time, among the small states of the North, 
Aetolia was popular. 

,Even so. h owever, Antigonos controlled seven^ votes while 
Aetolia actual!}' controlled only four. But one point that 
comes out clearly from the Delphic inscriptions is that, 
between 279 and Kynoskephalai (so far as the records go), no 
hieromnemones from the peoples under Macedonian control 
ever attended or voted. ^*'' It remains to seek the reason. To 

^** For the reader's convenience the Amphiktyonic votes may be given 
here. Before the Sacred War, the following had two votes apiece : 
Thessalians, Magnetes, Phthiot Achaeans, Perrhaibians, Dolopes, Phokians, 
Boeotians, Lokrians, Dorians, lonians, Malians, Ainianes. For the arrange- 
ments under Philip and Alexander, given in the text, see G. D. I. 2504, and 
Syll? 140, 1. 149, with Dittcnberger's notes. Of Alexander's four votes, two 
were, after 279, restored to Phokis (/. G. ii, 551, cf. Paus. 10,8, 3) ; the other 
two were at some time or other given back to Delphi. (Which votes were 
which is not material here ; see Kaerst I, 172, n. 3.) The list then, circ. 277, 
stood as follows: Aetolia 2 (i.e. I Lokrian and I Maiian), Delphi 2, 
Phokis 2, Boeotia 2, Dorians 2, lonians 2, Ainianes 2, Thessalians 2, Mag- 
netes 2, Phthiot Achaeans 2, Lokrians I, Malians I, Perrhaibians i, 
Dolopes I. — See generally: Hiller von Gaertringen, Delphoi in P. \V.\ 
Beloch 3, 2, 322-52. 

'" H. von Gaertringen, Dc/p/toi in P. IV., col. 2570 ; Beloch 3, 2, 325. — 
The festival which Antigonos' brother Krateros founded at Delphi in honour 
of, and in pursuance of a vow made by, his father, when he dedicated the 
bronze group of 'Alexander's hunting' by Lysippos and Leochares, must 
date from before the Aetolian control of Delphi. For details see P. Perdrizet, 
J.H.S. 1899, p. 273 ; for the monument, Pomtow in B.P/i. U\ 1912, loio. 


say, as has been said, that Aetolia excluded the Macedonian 
kings from the Amphikt3^ony ^^"^ is unsatisfactory; how could 
Aetolia do this ? Her military power was not adequate, at 
this time, to enable her to face Macedonia; and this is what 
exclusion must, in the ultimate resort, have meant. More- 
over, why should Aetolia exclude (say) an Athenian hiero- 
mnemon from the Amphiktyonic meeting while welcoming 
Athenian theoroi to the Soteria ? The reason must be 
sought on other lines, in the action not so much of Aetolia as 
of Antigonos. 

Aetolia was apparently popular with the states of the 
North. But Macedonia most certainly was not. Former 
kings of Macedonia had sought conquests among them ; 
Boeotia or Phokis could not know, as yet, but that Antigonos 
might pursue the policy of Demetrios and his predecessors. 
It was therefore a moral certainty that if Antigonos sent his 
hieromnemones to Delphi they would be outvoted ; Phokis, 
Boeotia, and the little peoples would vote against Macedonia 
on any question on which the interests of Antigonos and 
Aetolia conflicted. And Antigojios could not afford that his 
men should go to Delphi to be outvoted, that Macedonia 
should appear in the Amphiktyonic Assembly as on a level 
with the Ainianes or Doris. The onl}^ alternatives before 
Antigonos were complete control or complete abstention. 
Control meant a policy of conquest sufficient to give him at 
least thirteen votes ; it must have ended in a collision with 
Aetolia. In such a collision he might have been victorious, 
\ But none knew better than Antigonos how precarious his 
position in Macedonia was as yet ; much was to be done, 
and years must elapse, before he should be secure on his 
throne. He did not desire aggression in Northern Greece ; 
I he did not desire war; most certainly he did not desire a war 
I with Aetolia. He chose therefore the policy of abstention; 
he decided that his hieromnemones should never appear at 
Delphi, and that he would have nothing to do with the other 
Amphiktyonic states or the Amphiktyonic League. He 
recognized them as the sphere of Aetolia. The power of 
Aetolia certainly counted for something in his choice ; but it 
"^ Beloch, /. c. This is the basis of his arrangement of the archon dates. 


is permissible to believe that the welfare of his own country | ' 
counted for more. In a few years time his policy was to bear 
fruit ; Macedonia was thenceforth, while he lived, to be on 
Terms"br peace with Aetolia, terms even of friendship. But 
his^policy of abstention was to remain absolute ; and no 
state whose representatives appear at an Amphikt3T)nrc 
session can be a state controlled, at the time, by Antigonos.^'*^ 

Such was the position in Northern Greece. InJ.he-Pel£4iQJti- 
nese Antigonos equally sought no conquests, and did not 
__even trouble much to keep the cities which he had originally 
held! But here the situation differed. Here the strongest 
""state was unalterably hostile to Macedonia; Sparta would 
attack him if and when she could. /But at present Sparta 
was quiescent ; and Argos and Megalopolis, though indepen- 
dent,^^'* were committed, both by traditional policy and 
immediate self-interest, to keeping a jealous watch on Sparta, 
and acted as a check on her, acted inevitably, though inde- 
pendent, in the interests of the northern power that was 
Sparta's enemy. The situation was not one calling for any 
immediate action ; an^ AfTngonos," ~lv"ith more important 
matters on hand, could let the Peloponnese be, so long as no 
new factor arose. Even had Sparta wished to attack him, 
she would have found considerable difficulty in doing so to 
any good purpose, for she had no fleet and could not pass the 
Isthmus. Her hostility would not become of great moment 
unless she had the backing of some strong sea-power ; and 
what happened" in the. Peloponnese depended primaril}' on 
*the policy of Egypt. 

That policy, as initiated by the first Lagid, was simple and 
intelligible. Hold the sea, and stir up trouble for the Mace- 

'" I follow Beloch's conclusion here, though I have ventured to give a 
different reason for arriving at it. The consequence is that I follow in sub- 
stance Beloch's arrangement of the Delphic archons. All systems are very 
provisional ; but Beloch's commends itself by allowing for the steady growth 
of the Aetolian vote, in place of the spasmodic variations which appear in the 
lists of Pomtow, and of A. Mommsen in Philol. 60, 1901, p. 25. Moreover, 
the only new material known to me since Beloch wrote is said to confirm one 
part of his list, and in particular the important dating of Archiadas f^.udokos 
and Straton (see ch. 9, n. 27) to 273/2-271/70 ; E. Bourguet, B. C. H. 191 1, 
pp. 456, 481 (on a yet unpublished Amphiktyonic list). 

'« Ch. 5, n. 4^. 


donian in Greece by posing as the champion and prqtectpx.of_ 
GreeR independence ;' such was the sufficient formula. It 
*^was, If IS true, a policy that was bound to end in bringing 
Macedonia and Egypt into collision, if and when the former 
should be strong enough ; at the same time, scientifically 
carried out, it might prevent Macedonia from ever becoming 
strong enough. 

It looked, however, for the time being, as if this policy 
slept with Ptolemy Soter in his grave. For his son and 
successor, Ptolemy II Philadelphos, was of a very different 
nature. Alone .of the kings of his time he was no warrior ; 
his dealings with the war-god had consisted in putting two of 
his brothers to death in good Oriental fashion.^*'-' The prince 
who presided over Egypt's age of gold was but a sickly 
creature, a devotee of pleasure in all its forms, ever seeking 
new pastimes and new sensations,^''^ whether among his 
mistresses, or in the gorgeous pleasure-fleet that he kept on 
the Nile,^''^ or in his menagerie of strange animals from far-off 
lands ; ^^^ one who exhausted every form of luxury, and who, 
prostrated by gout, envied the simple joys of the beggars 
below his window, even while he dabbled in search after the 
elixir that should make him immortal.''^^' Extremely able, 
nevertheless ; a man of high culture ; ^''^ the first diplomat of 
his time ; governing Eg3^pt well, from the point of view of 
the Macedonian ruling caste, and amassing from it great 
treasures, as from a well-managed estate ; distinguished 
above all by the encouragement which, following his father's 
example, he gave to learning, art, and science, whereby he 
has made his name famous. His own tastes seem to have 
been opposed to war, and the first ten years of his reign 
were uniformly pacific ; secure in the command of the Aegean 
and the friendship of Sparta, there appeared to be no reason 
for his interference in Greece so long as Antigonos sought 
no concjuests there. In the years following 276 men may 

"» Paus. I, 7,1. ^ '^" Strab. 17, 789. 

'^^ The 6a\afir]yci ;(pvo-<)7rpv/ira Kni ;(pi'(rt-/:zj3oXa of Appian, P700i))i. lo. 
(Generally on this passage see App. 10, p. 456.) 
^^^ Kallixenos ap. Athen. 5, 200 f and 201 c ; 9, 387 d. 
153 phylarchos ap. Athen. 12, 536 e. 
^^* Ael. V.H, 4, 15' /^oi'crtKcororoj'. 




conceivably^ have begun to dream that peace, so long an 
exile, had returned to the world. 

There was, however, one cause of difference between Mace- 
donla'and Egypi-that was radical. Antigonos' polic}^ towards 
Greece hinged on the possession of Corinth ; without Corinth, 
Macedonia might be grievously injured by some combination. 
And Corinth (Euboea notwithstanding) was cut off from 
Demetrias by the sea ; and the sea was Egyptian. But the 
sea and its islands had once been the unquestioned possession 
of Demetrios ; wherever he had ruled or not ruled upon land, 
for twenty years his fleets had been all-powerful ; and on his 
fall the command of the sea had passed into the hands of 
Egypt without even a struggle. Granting that Macedonia 
could acquiesce without loss of honour in the independence 
of an ancient state like Boeotia, or in the federation of the 
tiny towns of Achaea, c£uld she so acquiesce in the continued 
dominion of another power over the League which the first 
Antigonos had created, and over Delos, the S3^mbol of her 
lost sea-power? Antigonos must be irrevocably impelled, 
both by loyalty to his father and considerations of the welfare 
of Macedonia as he understood it, to attempt the recovery of 
the sea. Egypt then was the one power, beside Sparta, 
which was clearly marked out as his enemy. At present 
he had far too much to do to attend to the sea ; but many at 
the court of Alexandria must have foreseen that some day he 
would try to recover this his father's dominion. Meanwhile 
there was peace; and the gorgeous edifice of Egyptian 
power, the home of such dazzling patronage of science and 
learning as the world had never 3'et beheld, seemed four- 
square to ever}' wind. 

JThereremains only the cit}- which for Antigonos was more 
important even than Egypt. These years were tiie golden 
age • of his ■" relations with Athens, which he frequently 
visited.^-^'^ The successor of Philip II was on the very best 
of terms with the city of Demosthenes ; so cordial were they 
as almost to hide away the fact that Athens was under 
Antigonos' suzerainty. 

""* Diog. L. 7, 6 ; and see a soldier's decree from Eleusis, F'erguson, Piiisls, 
p. 159, n. 75. 


Tlie nationalist government of Athens, which had come 
into power in 280, was still in power in November 277, when 
the administration was in the hands of a board ; Athens must 
have remained free and independent until some time in 276. 
But in 276 5 the pro-Macedonians are again at the helm.'""^ 
I'hc change of government is obviously connected in some 
way with Antigonos' accession to the throne of Macedonia; but 
how the altered position in which Athens thenceforth stood to 
the king was brought about is quite obscure. What is certain 
is that from 276 to 273 Athens stood in some loose connexion 
with Antigonos, under which Antigonos was treated as 'king', 
and for which connexion the term ' suzerainty ' may be used ; 
i and that during these years a pro-Macedonian government was 
I in power.^^^ In 276/5 this party put forward its political confes- 
sion of faith in the guise of that decree in honour of the veteran 
Phaidros of Sphettos to which allusion has so often been 
made;^^'^ and in 275/4 sacrifices were being offered at Athens 
'for the Senate and people of Athens, their wives and children, 
and Antigonos the king ', a phrase eloquent of Antigonos' posi- 
tion.^^^ In the autumn of 274 the Great Panathenaia, omitted 
in the year 278 on account of the troubles of the Gallic 
invasion, were celebrated afresh at Athens with much pomp. 
A devoted partisan of the king, Herakleitos, son of Askle- 
piades of the deme Athmonon, adorned the stadium for the 
occasion, and dedicated to Athene, giver of victory, a series of 
pictures illustrative of Antigonos' victory at Lysimacheia, or, 
as the Athenians put it, ' his struggle against the barbarians 
for the deliverance of the Hellenes '}^'' 

'^^ Nationalist government from 280 to Pyanepsion 277, anyhow ; ch. 5, 
p. 137, with n. 52. — Pro-Macedonian government in Euboulos' year, 276/5 ; 
/. G. ii, 331 = Sf//.'^ 213, 1. 57, Phaidros' son Thymochares is agonothetes, 
and his father assists him. At the same time a single superintendent of the 
administration replaces the board; ib. 1. 91 (275/4). 

'" It is no objection to this that Athens sent theoroi to the Soteria at 
Delphi ; for this,' unlike the sending of a hieromnemon, was entirely a re- 
ligious matter, to which Antigonos would not object. 

'^^ See ch. 2, p. 45, with notes 16 and 20. 

^^^ I. G. ii, 5, 323 b = Michel 1484 ; the sacrifices referred to were in 
Polyeuktos' year, a year before the decree. 

"° /. G. ii, 5, 371 b = SylL- 207 = Michel 1482. The year is not in doubt, 
as the omitted Panathenaia were those of 278/7 (Ferguson, Klio, 8, p. 338) ; 
see /. G. ii, 321, of that year, which points to a fear of some procession being 
attacked by some one. 


It has been shown alread}' how, at Athens, the old labels 
of oligarch and democrat gradually lost their meaning, and 
two new parties were formed, the pro-Macedonians and the 
Nationalists, each of course containing a more extreme and a 
more moderate wing. These two parties were to remain ; 
but the Nationalists were already perhaps ripe for some 
change in their position. In the long war with Antigonos 
that succeeded Demetrios' downfall the Nationalists had 
turned for help to many quarters, but had relied chiefly on 
Lysimachos of Thrace. Not onl}' was Lysimachos dead, but 
his kingdom had ceased to be ; there were in effect now but 
two great powers outside the peninsula, and one of them, 
Asia, was on permanently good terms with Antigonos. 
Hence we shall now find that the Nationalists tend more and 
more to become simply a pro-Eg3^ptian part}'. The reason 
was as simple as inevitable ; it arose out of Athens' depen- 
dence on foreign corn. 

The world contained at this time several much larger 
cities than Athens ; but every one of them — Alexandria and 
Antioch, Seleukeia and Syracuse, Carthage and Rome — 
easily fed herself. But Athens had for many 3'.ears been 
depen dent on f oreign coriL^'^^ So long as she had been a 
great naval power, the inconvenience of this had only 
occasionall}' been felt; but she was now no in .a posi- 
tion to guarantee her own supply of food. True, there was 
plenty of corn in the world to feed her; but, as it happened, 
there was no source of supply which was not open to the 
control of either Antigonos or Ptolemy, unless perhaps a 
very little might be got from Boeotia.^*^^ Macedonia, Thessaly, 
and Euboea (if Euboea was still in a position to export corn, 
which is doubtful),^*^'^ belonged to Antigonos; and he cut 
communication with Paionia. Eastward, the Aegean was an 
Egyptian lake, which the Egyptian fleet ruled as it pleased : 
nothing could cross but b}' leave of Egypt. The islands, in 

"' L. Gernet, ' L'approvisionnement d'Ath^nes en ble au v® et au iv« siecle ' 
(McliOJgcs (T/usioire aticienne, 1909), has an interesting calculation of what 
Athens actually required to import, vitiated, however, by acceptance of the 
figure of 400,000 slaves. 

'" But at the end of the century' Oropos was importing; Syl/." 547. 

'"' A little later Histiaia was importing; Syli? 245 = Michel 346. 


fact, were all importing corn themselves/" and so to some 
extent was Asia Minor, notably Ephesos;^^^ there ma}' still 
be read an Ephesian decree of thanks to a Rhodian sea- 
captain who landed an emergency cargo and broke the local 
corn-ring.^*^''' JThe only countries eastward that could export, 
putting aside Egypt herself (who could feed Athens and to 
spare), seem to have been the Thracian Chersonese,^"" and the 
Crimea. The former belonged to the Seleukids, who were 
friendly to Antigonos on the one hand, and on the other hand 
could not have protected their traders against Egypt if they 
had wished to, having merely a negligible fleeth The 
Crimea, Athens' old source of supply, could no doubi have 
fed her, though it has been thought that the amount of corn 
passing the Bosphoros at this time was small compared to 
what it had been in the days of Demosthenes ; ^*^^ but the 
Crimean suppl}- was exposed to a double danger. Antigonos' 
friend Bj'zantion controlled the Bosphoros, and could, if 
desired, see that any corn ships w^ere ' brought ashore ', as 
the phrase went ; ^^^ while, if the political position were 
reversed, Egypt, from her watch-tower of Samothrake,^'^'^ 
could pick them up as the}' emerged from the' Hellespont. 
From the west, too, nothing could be hoped. The corn 
from Syracuse came to Antigonos' port of Corinth ; if Car- 
thage exported, which is not known, the corn probably went 
to Egypt's dependenc}' Phoenicia in payment for the traffic 
of the east ; while Athens could no longer depend upon the 
pirate-infested Adriatic, since the loss of her fleet had 
rendered useless the naval station of Adria, which she had 

^^* The following import. Very end of fourth centurj' ; Andres, /. G. 
xii, 5, I, 714; Delos, Michel 3S6. Third century; los, /. G. xii, 5, 2, loio 
and loii ; Samothrake, /. G. xii, 8, 156 = Michel 351 = Sy//." 221 ; an un- 
known place connected with Delos. B. C. H. 1905, p. 201, no. 65, and B. C. H. 
1907, p. 374. Beginning of second century ; Arkesine, /. G. xii, 7, 40 ; the 
Islanders of the League generally, /. G. xii, 5, 2, 817. 

'^^^ O. G. /. 9 = Michel 491. The island of Nesos also imported, O. G. I. 4. 

'«s 5J///.2 548 = Michel 493. 

"■^ J. G. xii, 8, 156 B, 1. 16. •''* Gemet, op. c, p. 326. 

^®^ Polyb. 4, 38, 2. The technical term was KaTdyav. 

"° Samothrake was Egyptian from 281 till the second Syrian war. The 
main evidence is the dedication of the Ptolemaion by Ptolemy II. J. G. xii, 8, 
228. See Beloch 3, 2, 280; C. Friedrich, Introduction to the Samothrakian 
inscriptions in /. G. xii, 8. 


founded there about 326/5 in order that 'the people of Athens 
might at all times have a supply of corn '.^'^ There remained 
the great international corn markets, Delos and Rhodes ; 
but Egypt controlled Delos, and neither could be reached 
but by leave of the Eg3^ptian fleet. 

Consequently, between them, Antigonos and Ptolemy con- 
troTTed practically the entire supply ot corn availab le for 
feeding Athens. On one of the two Athens must depend ; 
choice there was none. She was like an island that could 
not feed itself and had lost its fleet. In time of peace it was 
well enough ; food came in naturall}^ for the gain of the 
merchant ; but should she offend Antigonos, she became by 
that very act dependent on Egypt, who alone could keep the sea 
open for her ; unless she had used the time of peace to store 
up corn, a matter requiring considerable foresight. Indepen- 
dence was a word with a fine ring about it ; but unfortunately 
even heroes must eat. 

It is to be hoped that it is no longer necessary to enter any 
defence of the Athens of this epoch against charges of 
degeneracy or decadence. Of course there were many 
unworth}' elements in the cit}^; but how many cities are free 
of such ? To point, as has been done, to the New Comedy 
and say, ' behold Athens,' is frankly absurd. The New 
Comedy may be of great importance in the history of litera- 
ture ; for the history of the time it has no importance at all. 
It may at the start have been drawn from life ; even so, it was 
clearly only life of a sort ; and not all the wit and elegance 
lavished on its presentation can conceal the fact that it soon 
became a convention. Leave the literary qualities aside, pass 
over the wit and the characterization, and a picture of Athens 
drawn from these plays is about as true as would be a picture 
of England drawn from (let us say) musical comedy. The 
real charge against the Athens of this epoch seems merel}' to 
be, that she failed ; that is to say, that she was at grips with 
forces physically stronger than herself. Precisely the same 
charge might be brought against the Athens of Thuc3'dides. 

Athens has a right to be judged, not on her stage plays, 
but on such things as her many struggles for liberty, or the 

'"' /. G. ii, 809 = .Sj'//.-' 153, taking Dittenberger's reading. 


portraits left by Antigonos of Karystos, or the language of 
the noble resolution moved by Chremonides. Admiration 
for her great past need not blind us to her great present. In 
the two generations following Alexander's death she did 
some of the hardest fighting in her history ; and there was 
not much sign of degeneracy about the men who led the 
national war against Antipatros, who fought against heavy 
odds the two days' sea-fight off Amorgos, who held their walls 
against Demetrios till they were glad to feed on dead mice, 
who stormed the Mouseion under Olympiodoros, and who at 
the last, when fall Athens must, fell with all honour in the great 
struggle which we call the Chremonidean war. There was 
little mark of decadence about the city that was still ' Hellas 
of Hellas', the home of all the great philosophies and the 
spiritual centre of the civilized world, the city that could 
draw and keep such men as Zeno and Epicurus, Arkesilaos 
and Kleanthes, men utterly different save in noble aims. 
What Athens said the world still repeated; those whom 
Athens honoured were honoured indeed. Wealth and power 
imight pass to others ; Athens alone had the secret of the path 
ithat raises men to the heavens.^'^^ 

^"^ Hegesand. ap. Athen. 6, 25of ; n'iWa ndvTn dvai koivo. rav 'EWrjvaii', Tr]v 
8' eVi Tov ovpavov av6(ja>novs (pepovaav 686p ' Adrjvalovs eldevai fiovovs : see the fine 

turn given to this by Wilamowitz, Atiligonos, p. 232. 



The virtual inclusion of Athens in Antigonos' sphere 
effectually prevented him from attempting to set up any 
rival university in Macedonia, even had he desired to do so. 
Both politically and geographically, Athens was too close to 
Pelja to permit of the formation there of ah}^ independent 
centre of intellectual activity on a great scale ; no second 
Museum was possible, even had Antigonos had the money 
to endow one. In fact, there was never anything in Mace- 
donia to compare even with such secondary seats of learning 
as Antioch or Pergamon. Athens was, and had to remain, 
the centre of gravity of the world of thought and of letters. - ^- 
She wa s still, as she had been for a century, the supreme 
intellectual centre, the home of all abstract thought ; within 
her walls the great philosophic schools, not unlike colleges, 
had their permanent head-quarters ; and even the little schools 
that still subsisted elsewhere, as at Megara or Eretria, were 
in the course of the generation then living to cease to have 
separate existence and merge in the Academy of Arkesilaos. 
Abstract thou ght was Athens' s tr ength ; perhaps. ^(}(;}, her — — . 
weakness. For to modern eyes it may look as if the main 
stream of the world's progress had already shifted to Alexan- 
dria, where the munificent endowments of the Ptolemies 
were, consciously or unconsciously, all concentrating upon 
the great rival, science. The glory of Alexandria was to be 
shown forth in her mathematicians and astronomers, her 
geographers and physicians, her scholars and encyclopae- 
dists; but, whatever their ultimate deserts, the immediate 
future did not lie with them. The immediate future lay with ^_ , 
the philosophers, the men whose pupils were to train the 
"Roman and wTTose teachings were to influence St. Paul ; 



and at present Athens was their home. But though she 
owed her chief importance to the philosopliic' schools, she 
was more than a home for philosophers. She still had almost 
a monopoly, as against Alexandria, of both history and 
comedy ; if she shared tragedy with her, tragedy had become 
of relativel}^ small importance. Whatever may be thought 
of the New Comedy, the enormous number of writers whom 
it attracted, their ability, and their huge output, show that it 
was at any rate alive and a force in the then world ; and 
though Menander was dead, the other most prolific leaders 
in this branch of art were all writing for the Athenian stage. 
Even more notably could Athens hold her own in history. 
Timaios was living there, writing the large book to which, 
with all its faults, we owe so much of our knowledge of the 
Western Greeks. Timaios was a Sicilian ; but Philochoros 
the soothsayer was an Athenian ; and had some parts of his 
numerous writings survived, we should know a very great 
deal more about the festivals and mysteries, the antiquities 
and customs, of Athens than has been vouchsafed to us. 
Possibly the rhetorical Athenian history of Demochares is 
no great loss ; for Demochares' profession was not history 
but words. But there was in Athens at this time, perhaps 
already storing up material, a young man from Euboea, who 
was to do a work well worth the doing, and invaluable to 
posterity even in the second-hand shape in which some parts 
of it remain : Antigonos of Karystos, who afterwards wrote 
the lives of the philosophers. 

It was obvious, however, that Antigonos, the pupil of 
Menedemos and Zeno, was not likely to be satisfied with a 
life oTwHTch the intellectual side was represented only by 
details of administration ; and, as there was no possibility of 
making Pella a second Museum or a second Athens, he set 
to work, immediately upon his accession, to gather round 
him a personal circle of notable men ;^ the bond that should 
hold them together was to be their common friendship with 
himself. It was, in fact, to be something like Menedemos' 
circle at Eretria on a much larger scale ; and of the men 
who came to Pella, it was precisely those whom the king 

* I am noTaware of any work pirofessedly dealing with Antigonos' circle. 




had known at Eretria who received the earliest invitations. 

"His" nfarriage with Phila offered an occasion and an oppor- 
tunity for collecting his literary friends about him ; and 
though the war with P3Trhos dispersed the circle at Pella, 
it formed again after P3Trhos' death. Though two of the 
most prominent among Antigonos' friends should really be 
noticed later — for Hieronymos may not have written much 
by 276, and Bion had ver}^ possibly not yet found his way 
to Pella at all — it may be convenient to give some slight 
account here of Antigonos' circle as a whole, and without 
distinguishing the earlier and the later epoch, for the sake 
of the clearer view thus obtained. 

The formation of something like a literar3' circle was not 
a new Lhiii| J ['} h T\/r5'<^f?nn ian L-ing Not to mention lesser 
names, Archelaos had entertained Euripides and Agathon, 
and Philip had secured Aristotle himself to be his son's tutor. 
Even Kassandros knew Homer by heart, and patronized 
Euhemeros.- But ha rdly one of the men who from time to 
_time adorned the courts of the earlier kings reall}' belonged 
there ; Euripides was none the less an Athenian of Athens 
"because he wrote the Bacchae at Pella. In Aristotle alone 
of the great names of Hellas could Macedonia claim her 
share, and that not only through his birthplace ; Aristotle 
would not be quite Aristotle had he not taught Alexander. 

The men who drew together to Antigonos were on a dif- 
ferent footing. One or two, it is true, were visitors from 

7 Athens ; Bion was cosmopolitan. But when we think of 
Aratos or Persaios, and still more of Hieronymos, we think 
of them as essential parts of the Macedonia of Antigonos ; 
we do not connect them with any other place. Antigonos 
went very near to shaping a new thing for Macedonia, a thing 
that might have been of the first importance could it have 

l as te d : " "The circle was obvlousl}^ formed and held together 

' by the king's own personality ; it included representatives only 
of those aspects of the intellectual life in which he himself 
was interested, poetry-, philosophy, histor}-.'' No man of 

- Athen. 14, 620b; Diod. 6, i, 4. 

' History ; it ran in his family, p. 243 ; his especial friendship for Hiero- 
nymos, p. 246. Poetry \ quotes Homer habitually; Diog. L. 4, 46; Stob. 

1475 Q 




science came to Macedonia ; science was tlie handmaid of 
the~~ T^loleiiries -,— aTi"d her sole representative at Pella \vas 
Antigonos' body physician, Aristogenes of Knidos or Thasos, 
who'wrote a medical compendium for the king's use.' Even 
when a considerable physicist, Straton, was active in Athens, 
it does not appear that Antigonos cultivated him. Antigo nos 
///stood with the Stoi_csj__an d, to a Stoic, scien ce had no 
ij \ meaning at all. 

This w^as to be exemplified clearly in the person of the 
most prominent of the poets at Pella. Antigonos had known 
Aratos of Soloi^ before; and, as already related, he came to 
Pella for the king's marriage with Phila, and wrote the 
wedding hymn in praise of Pan. Its success was evidently 
^— ^^^—i-marked, and Kx^^ became, and remained, Antigonos' court 
X.y^( poet ; for thoughhe quitted' T^lla, Mkc su many others, in 

^^ the troubles of 273, and went to Antiochos, he returned later 

to Macedonia and lived there till his death. As court poet 
he wrote the things that were expected of him : another 
hymn called the Treaty-bearers," of which the occasion is 
unknown ; the usual Praise of Antigonos ; a series of short 

Flor. 54, 46 ; cf. Plut. Mo7-. 182 F, no, 17. Quotes an unnamed tragedian, 
see note no. Sostratos mollifies him by quoting Homer, ch. 13, p. 387 ; he 
incites Aratos to write, p. 227. He adapts his quotations to suit himself ; Plut. 
Mor. 330 E, he has altered a word (see note no) ; the hexameter in Stob. 
Flo7\ 54, 46, T] h6\<ji rje ^iij rj a/Lt0a66)/ t]€ Kpv(pr]86p, is Composed of halves of two 
lines, Od. 9, 406 and Od. 14, 330. Such a trait argues considerable familiarity 
with the writers so treated. 

^ Susemihl i, 783. The book was called eTnTOfxt) cPvo-lkcou (ior]6r]fxdT(x>v npbs 

® See the following, since Susemihl (i, 284). E. Maass, Aratea (vol. xii of 
Kiessling and Wilamowitz, Philologische UntersicchungeJi), 1892 ; Arati 
Phaenomcfia (the text), 1893; Commeniarioriun in Arattan reliquiae, 1898. 
Wilamowitz, ' Aratos von Kos,' in Nachrichteti von d. konigl. Gesellschaft d. 
Wiss. zu Gottingen, 1894, p. 182; on this, W. Christ in Siisimgsb. d. k. Ak. 
Wiss. Miinc/ie?i {Philosoph.^philol. ii. hist. Cl.)^ 1903, p. 381, and Wilamowitz' 
^•eply, Hermes, 1905, p. 138. Knaack, Aratos, no. 6, in P. W. G. Kaibel in 
Hermes, 1894, p. 82, a brilliant appreciation. J. W. Mackail, Lectures on 
Greek Poetry, 1910, p. 194 seq. (chiefly on his style). —The five Lives (inc. 
Suidas), given in A. Westermann's (Bioypdcpoi, are now given by Maass in 
the book of 1898. With Life 3 (Theon of Alexandria), p. 146, Maass also 
gives the old Latin translation, which in some points amplifies the Greek. 
I keep the numbers as in Westermann for convenience. It is thought that 
the Lives go back to an early and good common original. 

* Maass, Aratea, p. 229, reads Suidas as follows: vp.vovs. els rov Ilavn' 
27i-oi>8o(f)6povs. This is preferable to Usener's suggestion (P/tein. Mus. 29, 
p. 41) that the plural v^vovy ih tov Yi.ava would imply a contest of poets. 




poems addressed to PhilaJ All these are lost. But it was 
not by these that Aratos was to be known to posterity. 

Of the little that is recorded of the poet's earlier life,^ the 
one point that stands out is his Stoic S3'mpadiies. ' He may 
himself, like so many Stoics, ha\v been half an Oriental ; for 
according to one version his father's name was Mnaseas 
(Manasses).'' His earliest teacher had been Menekrates, the 
grammarian of Ephesos, who wrote a poem on agriculture. 
He had then passed some time in Athens, where he had 
frequented the Porch ; one account makes him a pupil of 
Zeno himself, another (not so trustworthy), of Zeno's pupil 
Dionysios of Herakleia. His outlook then was similar to 
that of Antigonos ; and according to the tradition, which 
need not be disbelieved, it was Antigonos who put into his, 
hands the work of Eudoxos, and requested him to versify 
that century-old star-catalogue.^" The result was the much-' 
lauded Phainomeha}^ Its literary history would fill a volume. 
Critics, who rightly saw in it a wider outlook than could be 
found in the Works and Days of Hesiod, were driven to 
compare Aratos to Homer ; his friend Kallimachos praised 
his learning ; a later epigrammatist indulged in the hyperbole 
that Zeus had indeed made the stars glorious, but Aratos 
had given them an added glory.^^ These praises compare 
strangely with the quiet, plain, and (to tell the truth) ex- 
cessively dry versification of the poem, most of which has 
absolutely nothing in common with the five ringing lines in 

' Etff ^ AvTiyopov' eniypafjLfMTa tis 4>i\ai/ rrjV dvyarepa ^AurnrciTpov (an obvious 
slip) yvvaiKa 8' 'Avriydvov (Suidas). Many other (lost) poems are known. 

* Wilamowitz, /. c, definitely put an end to the belief that the Aratos of 
Theokritos, /</. 7, was the poet ; unless new evidence comes to light. A. T. 
Murray, Araftts and Theocritus, 1911, has again put forward the view that 
the Aratos oi Id. 7 was the poet, but has not convinced me. (See J. Sitzler, 
W. Kl. Ph. 1 91 2, 1049.) — An Aratos of Kos was architheoros to Delos some 
time before 279, /. G. xi, 161 B, 1. 55, and 203 b, 1. 38 ; and the son of an 
Aratos (.'the same) was theoros to Pella circ. 252 (decree of Peila, ch. 7, 
n. 54). » Fourth Life. 

'" Maass, Aratea, says he used Eudoxos' Phatnoinena, and not his ' Mirror', 
as the first Life says ; ch. 5, 6, 7, passii/i. Wilamowitz, /. c, followed by 
Knaack, accepts the tradition that Antigonos commissioned Aratos to write. 

" Of which the so-called Diosemeia forms the conclusion. It was subse- 
quently fitted with a forged prologue in honour of Antigonos, beginning 
'Ai/Tt-yoj/f, f«(Va)j' itp<)v di'iKoi (Maass, Aratea, pp. 17, 222). 

" Leonidas of Tarentum {A. P. ix, 25) : km Aids dvai | 8(vTfpov, Sans tdrjn' 
aarpa ^afivorepa. 



which Homer has caught something of the magic of the stars. 
That Aratos adopted this style on purpose is clear ; '^ for 
there was a spark of the real fire in him somewhere, and he 
could write poetry when he chose. One sees this in occa- 
sional passages, such as the lines which describe the star-set 
heavens at the time of the new moon,^* or the image of the 
paths of the Hours as they race across the sky — a phrase, 
from its associations, finer perhaps to ourselves than to a 
Greek ; ^^ most of all in the swing of the noble prelude. But 
if Aratos wrote plainl}^ and soberly on purpose, what does 
all the praise mean ? It was not lavished upon him merely 
because he provided dr^^ bread for readers surfeited with 
literar}' sugar-plums. 

Aratos in fact wrote as a Stoic, and wrote with a purpose. 
The Pliainomena was the first halting attempt that the world 
had seen at a work written 

with patient plan 
To justify the ways of God to man. 

His real aim was to bring out the Stoic doctrine of provi- 
'dence.^*' We may perhaps compare the Pliainomena for a 
moment with the far greater work that was to be written by 
one whose s^^mpathies were with the riv^al school of Epicurus ; 
the poem of Lucretius ' On the nature of things '. Each of 
the two poets was an absolute stranger to the scientific spirit, 
and cared only for science in its bearing on men. Lucretius 
flung a mighty passion into his description of the evolution 
of the world, not because he cared for the evolution of the 
world in itself, but because it gave him a splendid lever 
with which to overthrow the popular gods ; to free mankind 

'^ On the style see Kaibel, I.e., Mackail, /. c. 

'^ Line 469 seq. 

'^ This is not in the PJumiometia. The inscription on a marble dial 
recently found in the temple of Poseidon at Tenos (/. G. xii, 5, 2, 891) cele- 
brates the maker Andronikos of Kyrrhos (who built the Tower of the Winds 
at Athens) as a second Aratos, because he knew how to 'divide the shining 
circle of the heavens ' and to depict aWfpoSpofjLcop KeXfvdovs apeav ; and from 
a comparison with Kaibel, Ep. 185 (see editor's note), Cronert deduced 
that this fine phrase must be Aratos' own. But we can hardly avoid reading i| 

into it the associations of the Hours in Shelley's Pronetheiis. || 

^^ See Wilamowitz, I.e., p. 196, and Kaibel, I.e., p. 86. — Wilamowitz, " 

however, has since taken the view {Griech. Lit. 1905, p. 132) that his object 
was 'wichtiges Wissen seinem Volke mitzuteilen '. 



from fear of the gods was the real aim of his desire. Aratos 
plodded through his star-catalogue, not because he cared for 
astronomy in itself, but because the obvious utilit}' of the stars 
to sailor and husbandman afforded material to illustrate his 
text that Zeus takes forethought for men, his children : that 
the gods care. That is why St. Paul, when speaking in a 
later Athens of the God who was Lord of the heavens, and 
who had determined appointed seasons for men, if haply they 
might feel after Him, naturall}' made appeal to the Stoics 
among his audience by quoting Aratos.^" 

With Aratos came two lesser poets. Alexander the Aet0;;__ 
lian " was one of the so-called Pleiades, the seven writers of 
tragedy of the time, and had returned to Athens after 
arranging the tragic poets in the Alexandrian librar}^ As 
a poet he tried every form, tragedy, epigram, elegiacs, narra- 
tive epics, even kinaidologiai, these last being mimes to be 
accompanied by music and dancing, a species of composition 
of which the wit largely consisted in calling a spade a spade, 
and which in consequence furnished an effective if dangerous 
vehicle for attacking those in high places. Rather better 
known is Anfrag-^ra s of RhnHpqJ'-* ^pjp pnet nnd epicure^ 
' a terrible fellow to coin strange words.' He only stayed 
tw o years at Pella^ for all hjs nffinifip<? wprp with Athens and . 
the Academy. . His masterpiece, the Thebais, may not have 
surpassed other third-century attempts of the sort ; and his 
seven famous lines on the birth of Love disclose no particular 
claim to immortality. But there remains rather an attractive 
little picture of him on campaign, toasting a bit of conger eel 
over the camp fire and bandying chaff with Antigonos ; and 
he left at least one poem that rings true, the beautiful epitaph 
written for the tomb that contained the ashes of both his 

" Alts 17, 28 : ' for we also are his oftspring.' Paul quotes Aratos and 
Klcanthes together, but m/orm he follows Aratos. One may perhaps doubt 
Wilamoivitz' most ingenious reasoning (/.<:., 1894, p. 197) designed to show- 
that Kleanthes came first and was himself quoted by Aratos. Both were 
Stoics ; may not the words, in some form or other, have been already Stoic 
property ? 

"* Susemihl i, 187. The evidence for his belonging to Theokritos' circle 
is nil. He wrote a Daphnis, and Tityros of Id. 7 wrote a Uaphnis. 

'^ Susemihl i, 380. See Diog. L. 4, 26 and 27 ; Hcgesand. ap. Athen. 8, 
340 f= Plut. .Mor. 182 F, no. 17. —The epitaph ; Diog. L. 4, 21. 


friends of the Academy, Polemon and Krates, telling that 
they were lovel}' and pleasant in their lives and in death were 
not divided. 

But poetry, after all, was of small account com£ared_vviih 
the question whetlier Zeno could be induced to come to 
Pella. Antigonos kept urging him to come ; - ' but the old 
philosopher had struck root in Athens too deep to move, and 
he desired moreover to maintain the neutral attitude in 
politics which he had alwa3's practised."^ The correspon- 
dence that passed on this occasion between the king and his 
master, had it survived, would have been invaluable for the 
light thrown on two notable characters ; but it is hardly 
necessar}' to repeat that the letters we have,-- replete with 
excellent sentiments, are forgeries of a later time ; Jhat oX ^ 
Antigonos in particular is as unlike the king's brusque 
utterance as can well be imagined. Antigonos of course 
invited Zeno as the man whom of all men he most deeply 
honoured; he may have wished for him as his spiritual 
director, but the idea that he wanted his assistance in re- 
organizing Macedonia need only be mentioned to be set 
^,aside.^^.^Of all unpractical idealists Zeno was the very w^orst ; 
and Antigonos, a man of middle age, trained in two hard 
schools, that of Antipatros and that of adversit3^, must have 
already forgotten more about the art of governing than Zeno 
had ever learnt. Certainly in his youth, when under Cynic 
influence, Zeno had written a famous treatise 'on the State'; 
but it was not a treatise that could be of any use to a ruler 
in a real earthl}' kingdom. His State was the ideal State of 
the C3'nicS; of which all men were citizens, in which there 
were neither national boundaries nor temples of the gods, 
in which all ordinary social and economic relationships were 
dissolved, and property and wives alike held in common, and 
which was kept together merely b}' the willing consent of its 
citizens; the State of a philosophic Anarchist. The book 
survived merel}' as a curiosit}', to be a terrible thorn in the 
side of the later Stoics; they could only reply to their 

2° Diog. L. 7,6. 21 Seech, i, p. 35. 

-^ Diog. L. 7, 7-9. See some considerations in Cronert, Kolotes und 
Menedemos^ pp. 28, 29. 

"^^ Usener, Rhei?i. Mus. 29, p. 42 ; really based on the forged letters. 



opponents, who were never tired of quoting it at them, that 
even Zeno had not always been Zeno."* 

As Zeno wou ld not comfiy. Antigono s . a s ked ..him-tQ^a^nd 
one of his pupils instead, so that the Porch might be directly 
repre sented at Pella. T here must have been a question who 
should go.^'^ Honest drudging Kleanthes, slowest of the slow, 
with his oddly incongruous gift of writing great religious 
poetry, was out of the question ; he, the only man who could 
' shoulder Zeno's burden \'^'^ was already marked out as his 
successor in Athens. Dionysios of Herakleia, who had once 
been one of Menedemos' circle, was afQicted with hopeless 
ophthalmia, and was perhaps already meditating that trans- 
ference of his allegiance to the Cyrenaic doctrine of pleasure 
which earned him the name of Turn-coat.^'^ Herillos of 
Carthage was suspect, and more than suspect, of heresy.-^ 
Ariston of Chios, called the Siren, was persuasive of speech,^^ 
and witty of pen ; ^° even to-day he may please a stray reader 
here and there by his forcible reminder of the fact that 
flying will not make men wiser or better.^^ But he, too, was 
more or less of a heretic ; he had strong leanings toward 
undiluted Cynicism, and was moreover rooted in Athens, 
The man whom Zeno finally chose was Persaios of Kition, 
his fellow-countryman and favourite — scandal whispered, his 

-■* Zeno's TTfpi TToXirfids- ; Arnim 27, 41, 259 to 271 ; Diog. L. 7, 4; Suse- 
mihl I, 56, n. 193 and references. See especially the new fragment of Philo- 
demos nepX tcov ^TanKcuv, published by Cronert, Kolotes, pp. 55-67, where the 
Epicurean attacks Zeno's state in fine fighting style ; Col. xv, 15, the apologists 
have to say, Z^vuiv yap ovk ijv ael, he was not always Zeno ; he was once (xvi, 
9) a nobody, navTtXoos ov8fls. The sentence here seems quite complete in 
itself, and not to require the addition of veos (A. Korte, G. G.A. 1907, p. 259) 
or the alteration of Zi]vu>v to Zijvwviov (O. Crusius, Philol. 66, 1907, p. 599). 

-'' Zeno's pupils; Diog. L. bk. 7; Susemihl i, 59; kxx\\\w, passi)n . 

^^ Arnim 463 = Diog. L. 7, 170. 

" 'o i.i6Ta6(H€voi. Arnim 422 = Diog, L. 7, 166, 167, The second life of 
Aratos puts it bluntly, ds rjdovus /xfTa^e/xeVw (how, by the way, could one in 
constant pain get 'pleasure'?) ; cf. Athen. 7, 281 d = Arnim 430. 

^* Arnim 411, 413. 

-^ lb. 333, TTflfTTtKOf, 

^" That is, if the o/iotto/inra were really his. Arnim {Arisio/i, no. 56, in 
P. IV. ii, I, col. 957) thought this a difficult question; Gcrcke in P. IV., 
Ariston, no. 52 (the Peripatetic), says that the o/:iotio/noTfi arc either not the 
Stoic's or are a collection from the works of both. But more recently Arnim 
has printed the fragments under Ariston the Stoic. 

^' Arnim 353. 


liberated slave."^ He was accompanied by one Philonides of 

/Ihebes, a mere name. 
^ - Zeno^s xhoice of a philosophic. director for ihe. king turned 
out a bad one ; Persaios was not man enough for the post. 
In Zeno's company he ma}' have been well enough; with 
that strong hand removed, he degenerated from the philo- 
sopher into the courtier, and learnt where he should have 
taught.''^ He ^ould repeat the Stoic catchwords, but the 
Stoic spirit was not in him.'^^ He found favour with Antigonos, 
who made him tutor of his son Halkyoneus ; but the favour 
was extended as a matter of course to Zeno's friend, and 
Persaios sought to maintain it by being all things to all men, 
^a dangerous doctrine in weak hands. He wrote indeed among 
other things the inevitable treatise ' On Kingship '.^^ But the 
work of his of which we hear most is one entitled Dialogues 
of the Banquets ; --^ and these banquets had nothing in common 
with the famous Symposia of Plato or Menedemos; it would 
be as true to the Greek, and truer, apparently, to the facts, 
to write it Dialogues of the Boon Companions. Because a vv^eak 
; side of Antigonos, as of most of the great Macedonians, was 
•J a fondness for the feast and the wine-flask, Persaios must 
j needs study and describe all the details of debauchery ;^^ 
and if gossip was to be believed, the hero of a particularly 
discreditable episode related in the book was none other 
than the philosopher himself in his cups. It was not in this 

''^ Third and fourth Lives of Aralos ; Arnim 437 (= Ind. Stoic. Hefc, col. 
xii, 3), 435 (= Diog. L. 7, 36), 439 (= ib. 7, 6). Opinions on this story have 
varied ; but it is not likely to be true. Susemihl's conclusion, that it origi- 
nated simply in Bion's revenge on Persaios (l, 69, n. 263), is as likely to be 
right as anything. — The fourth Life of Aratos says that Persaios came to 
Macedonia at the time of Phila's marriage ; this is confirmed by the mention 
of him by Epicurus as at Antigonos' court. 

^^ Arnim 441 = I/td. S/oic. Here, col. xiii, a'iTio{v ey)eV6ro tovtov km to 
X(t)pi(rdi]vai Zrjvoovos ovtos en iToWn{v cr)u»' {'A)vTiy6i'a> Koi {a)iJ.a irfp{i)Tr\apa(Tdai, 
To(i') nvXiKuv, ov T()i> cf)i\6[(T)o(pov 1] j)ijfievoi' filov. 

^* Arnim 435 = Diog. L. 7, 36. Elaborated by Themistios, Or. 32, p. 35S 
= Arnim 449. It may not be true, but it shows that Persaios was considered 
the right peg on which to hang such a story. 

^^ nepi /Sao-tXf/ay; Diog. L. 7, 36. 

^'' 'S.vyLivoTiKa VTrofivquara (Athen. I3, 607b; Diog. L. 7, l), or a-VjjLTroTiKoi 
8iii\oyoi (Athen. 4, 162 b). Probably the former was the title, the latter 
merely a description of contents. 

^" See the description of portions of this work given by Athenaics, in one 
case as a long passage quoted verbally, in the other as a summary' of contents. 




way Jhat .Zen^o, and Menedemos had won their influence 
over the king. Persaios indeed was the one man whom 
Menedemos heartily hated; he waged uncompromising war |^_ 

"againsThim, and said once, over his wine, that Persaios might 
Be a sort of philosopher, but as a man he was the worst of 

~all that were or ever would be.^* This whole-hearted verdict 
may be liberally discounted, for Persaios had dissuaded 
Antigonos from restoring to Eretria its freedom, and Mene- 
demos took it bitterly to heart ; but no doubt, too, this incident 
showed him what sort of effect Persaios was likely to have 
upon the king. Perhaps the best that can be said for Persaios 
is that he had plenty of wit, was doubtless good company, 
and was faithful to Antigonos as he understood it. 

The most important figure, howe\-er, at Pella, from the 
poinr^''\Te\<roT philosophy, was not Persaios, but that strange 
creature Bion of Borysthencs. •' The la^t word un Bion is, 
as yet, far from having been written ; for few men in the 
third century are harder to judge, and few perhaps had 
more influence. 

Bion is the lineal ancestor of that long Hne of wandering 
teachers^" who were to attain to such importance in the first 
two centuries of the Roman empire, and who were to lead 
a pagan revival side by side with the growing advance ot 
Christianity. In the third century the^J^'iandering teatrher 

was a new thing. 

He called himself, and others called him. 

'* Diog. L. ii, 143, 1 44. The words are (fnXovoipos fifv toi roioiros, a«")p S* 
Koi Tiov ovTo)v Kai TO)v y(vr]a-ofi('v(ov KiiKtoroy. Menedemos perhaps had in mind 
Xenophon, Symp. 2, 10, where Antisthenes calls Xanthippe the most difticult 
of all women, past, present, and future, tu>v olavtv olfiai 8e koL rcoc yfy(i't]fxfv(ai' 
Kai T<ov ((TOfifi'cop ;^aX67ra)r(iT/7. 

^'■' Life in Dioyenes 4, cap. 7 ; scattered fragments in I'lutarch and Stobaeus; 
Teles, TTfpl nvTaf)K(uis, is supposed substantially to represent Bion (Wilamowitz, 
Antigonos, p. 296) ; his ideas and phrases are scattered through the other 
fragments of Teles. — The best thing on Bion known to me is the Prolego- 
mena to Otto Hense's Tclctis reliquiae, 2nd ed., 1909. See also Susemihl 1, 
32; Gomperz, Greek Thinkers (Eng. tr., vol. ii, p. 241); C. Wachsmuth, 
Sillographorum Ciraecoruvi reliquiae, p. 75; Arnim, Bion in P. W. — Tiie 
scanty poetic fragments are given by Wachsmuth, op. c, and by H. Diels, 
Poetarum Philosophorum Fragmenta, 1901 (vol. iii, part i of Wilamowitz' 
Poetarum Graecorum Fragmenta) ; the papyrus fragments by Cronert, 
Kolotes und Menedemos, p. 3 1 . 

^° Se&\\"\\\\\\.z, Antigonos ; Exctirs : der kynische Prediger Teles. For 
the later period, Sir S. Dili, Roman Society from Nero to Manus Aurelius, 
the chapter entitled ' The Philosophic Missionary '. 


a [>liili.>"j)her ; l)ut his mission was, not to seek out wisdom, 
but to take existing wisdom and popularize it. Man}', who 
had neither the time nor the money to attend a course of 
lectures at Athens, nevertheless desired to learn something 
of the new knowledge. The ordinary man, then as now, 
must have longed for something to help him in the troubles 
of life and console him in its sorrows, and must have felt 
that his subscription to the local temple did not always 
produce an adequate return in spiritual benefit. Many again 
in many places were eager merely to hear some new thing ; 
and, unless human nature has altered considerably, there 
would be a small minority almost anywhere ready to adopt 
the new thing as soon as they had heard it. All these men 
the wandering teachers professed to serve, and doubtless, 
according to their lights, did serve. But we must beware of 
making too much of them at this time, or of reading into the 
third centur}^ before Christ facts and tendencies which belong 
to the first two centuries after. Those of them whose names 
are known at this period generally gave up wandering about 
and settled down in Athens or elsewhere ; *^ it looks as if 
the demand for their services was not very insistent. But 
a new movement had been started, a movement fraught with 
large consequences, even if we can hardly listen to the 
paradox that the wandering teacher of philosophy was the 
forerunner of the Christian preacher.'*'- 

Much of the traditional life of Bion, as given by Diogenes, 
is hardly worth setting down here. It is encumbered with 
stories now universally recognized as malicious inventions ; 
their repetition serves no good purpose. He seems to have 
used his wit freely_ on. .other teachers, all and sundry;*" 
naturally the}' or their adherents retaliated. That he was 
of very humble birth, and that as a boy he had once been 
a slave, is possible enough. But he had studied philosophy 
at Athens under the best masters, Xenokrates and Krates 

*^ Of the five names given by Wilamowitz, Bion and Timon settled in 
Athens and Diodoros Kronos in Alexandria ; Theodores of Cyrene and 
Hegesias, 6 neicnddvaTos, attempted to settle in Athens and Alexandria re- 
spectively, but were turned out for their opinions. 

^^ Wilamowitz, /. c, pp. 313, 314. 

*^ Diog. L. 4, 53, oXws Ka\ fxovaiKfjv Kai yeafifTpiav StfVaifer. 


at the Academy,^* Theophrastos at the Lyceum, and the 
Cyrenaic Theodores ; for himself he took up a Cynic view, 
tempered by that of the Cyrenaics. On coming to Pella'*'^ 
he found himself in conflict with Persaios and the Stoic 
interest ; tradition has it that the courtly Persaios refused to 
associate with the smuggler's son, and appealed to Antigonos 
It seems true enough that, on some occasion, Bion did tell il 
the king tKaf ifhis origin was in fact lowl}', he would onIyT[ 
deserve all the more honour for having made himself what K 
he was, a sentiment that coincided with Antigonos' own| 
opinion.*^ How long Bion stayed at Pella is not known. 
He taught in different places, including Rhodes, and finally 
settled down at Athens, and is said to have died at Chalkis 
in great want and misery, relieved at the end by Antigonos, 
who heard of his plight and sent two slaves to nurse him. 

It is probable that Bion's relations with Antigonos were 
very much closer than written tradition gives us any idea of. 
Among the fragmentary notices that remain relative to the 
two men or to their sayings, the parallels in language are 
too frequent and curious to be accidental ; but whether they 
point to the influence of the king upon Bion or Bion upon 
the king, or whether the^' merely reflect certain language 
current in court circles, or whether again the explanation is 
that the numerous notices of Antigonos and his sayings in 
Plutarch and elsewhere derive ultimately from some writing 
of Bion's and are coloured by his style, we are bound in any 
case to beheve in a close association of the king and the 

" Gomperz defends the tradition, given by Diog. L. 4, 23, that Bion's 
teacher Krates was the Academic, not the Cynic ; o/>.c.,^ vol. ii, 241, and iii, 
300 ; and so Hense, Te/es'^, p. Ixvii. The difficulty is, if Bion's known 
teachers were two Platonists, a Peripatetic, and a Cyrenaic, how came he to 
be, as he certainly was, a good three-quarters Cynic ? 

*'^ Date unknown ; except that Persaios, who came about 276, was already 
established there. 

" Hense, /. c, p. Ixxxvii, thinks Bion's letter to Antigonos (Diog. L. 4, 46) 
genuine, or at the worst (with Kiessling) ' ad veritatem ficta ' ; and that the 
fragment Stob. F/or. 86, 13, is from the same letter. This last gives Bion's 
claim, that a man is what he makes himself, eVt toip (^tXcoi/ t^iTdCt ov iraOfv 
il(T\v dWa Tiva. Antigonos said much the same, Plut. A/or. 534 c = 183 D, 
no. 4, (ii'8p(iya6ias ov TraTpayn6ias »ctX. Hense, p. Ixxxviii, attributes both 
sayings to Bion; i.e. Bion said that this is what Antigonos would have said 
if asked. This seems a refinement; but it would of course be just as good 
evidence for what Antigonos himself did think. 



wandering philosopher." In one passage Bion praises some 
person unnamed as a good ruler, a generous giver, and one 
who used large resources well ; it is not likely that any one 
but Antigonos can be the ruler referred to.^* 

The obvious view of Bion — too obvious perhaps— is written 
atlaro£_in the tradition. A professed free-thinker, hke Theo-.. 
Horos, he had gone about the world giving his lectures, taking. 

this or that moral point and treating it in common language, 
arguing it with an imaginar}' opponent, decking it out with a. 
good sto ry or a quotation from some poet, trying every means 

that his nimble wit could suggest of winning the assent or the 
applause of half-educated audiences and getting them to 
Amount the steed of learning',*^ But in attempting to popu- 
larize he merely vulgarized ; philosophy was dragged forth 
from the quiet lecture-room into the crowded market-place, 
and the goddess of the few became the mistress of the many.^" 
That this is partly true is certain ; as certain as it is that it 
is only part of the truth. The first statement can be illus- 
trated from various sources which show things not particularly 

*'' I have made a rough list. 

(a) A man is what he makes himself; references, n. 46. 

(^j Antigonos; kingship is evbo^os dovXeia (p. 2 $6 post). Bion ap. Stob. 
J^/or. 46, 23, the good ruler (cf. Teles, irepi avrapKeuti, 1. 8, Bion to Antigonos, 
crii fiiv ap)((is KnXois) ought to become fit) nXovcncore pov oXX' ivbo^ortpov. 

{c) Bion ap. Plut. Mor. 561 C, the sins of the fathers are not visited on 
the children. lb. 562 F ; Antigonos is an instance that they are not always 
so visited (.^ultimately from Bion). 

{d) Bion, deuTpiKos, Diog. L. 4, 52; i.e. he played to the gallery, the 
crowd. Antigonos played to Zeno alone, Zeno was /i/s dfarpof, Diog. L. 7, 
15 (cf. Epicurus, fr. 208, Usener, 'satis enim magnum alter alteri theatrum 

{e) Antigonos of Zeno, ttoXXcov koI fxeydXav alra 8i8ofieva>i> iiTT ep.ov aidenoTe 
ixavvioBrf oide Taneivos u>(f)dr) (Diog. L. 7, 1 5). Bion to Antigonos (in Teles, 
nepl atiTapKeias) (tv , . . 8i8<as eXevdfpias, fyu) di Xafx^duu) evdapaais napci crov, ovx 
VTToninTojp ovSe ayevvi^aiv ov8e fiep.'<^ip.oip(i)v. 

(/) Antigonos calls the diadem puKm (Stob. Flat: 49, 20). Cf. Bion on 
the good man, ocrTti kciI iv tois pciKiaiv ov8ev fxelov BiiTrpfrrtv t) iv t;) ovXtj ^Xaivrj 
rfj Trop(f)vpa. Also Bion himself, oiijj' (k pnKtav (Eratosth. ap. Strab. i, 15). 
** Teles, iT(p\ airapK. 1. 8 seq., which Hense^, p. Ixxix, refers to Antigonos. 
*'■' The traditional view is Diog. L. 4, 47 and 52 ; he was dearpiKos ('playing 
to the gallery' is the exact translation), used ^opriKols ov6p.nai, was noXvrpo- 
TTOi (like Odysseus), ao(pia-Tf]s ttoiklXos (a thing of patchwork ; but the word 
has a good meaning too, iridescent), nXfiaras d(j)opixas 8(8coKa>s rots ^ovXofxepois 
Kudimzu^eadai (f)iXoao(f}las. 

^° Eratosthenes said he dressed philosophy in livOiva, the coloured garments 
of the courtesan ; Diog. L. 4, 52, Strabo i, 15. 


to Bion's credit. Plutarch quotes one saying of which the 
downright vulgarity struck him no less forcibly than it does 
ourselves ;°^ a modern writer cites his wanton attack on the 
revered Archytas as more damaging to him than all the 
stories concocted by his opponents.^- In fact he could not 
refrain from making- cutting . remarks ahQiiL,_e.very one he 
came across : about Aratos the poet no less than Persaios, 
possibly even about P3Trhos and Antigonos himself.^^ It 
was natural, in view of his reception by Persaios, for him to 
revenge himself by putting about the story that Persaios had 
been as much of a slave as he had ; but if the sneer at Anti- 
gonos that has come down to us be really from Bion (it is, 
fortunately, though probable, by no means certain), we should 
have to condemn severely one whose tongue could not spare 
even his best friends. And above all, his prostitution of 
philosophy rests on the weighty testimony of no less a 
person than Eratosthenes. 

But it is Eratosthenes himself who la3's stress on the fact 
that this is but half the truth. Strip off the shreds and tatters, 
he says, and you will find the real Bion, like Odysseus under 
the beggar's rags.'* And when we turn to the one poor con- 
nected piece that remains — and that at second-hand — from all 
Bion's writings,^^ we do find something quite unexpected. 
Here is no man in motley, squandering his wit on pla3'ing to 
the galler}^ Instead, we see one who, in all soberness, 
is preaching to those who will listen a veiy simple and 

'^ Plut. Mor. 770 B, C. '^- Goniperz, /. c. 

^ Attack on Persaios, Athen. 4, 162 d. On Aratos, tovs aa-rpovofiovi'Tcis, 
Stob. /'/or. So, 3. — Pyrrhos and Antigonos are alluded to in Teles, Trepi rrfvius 
(Hense'^, p. 43), though Hense does not mention it. The cumulative passage 
from the top of p. 43, oik€tt]s iariv' kt\., has a strong resemblance in thought 
to Plut. Pyrrh. 14 ; and it is pretty obvious that, in the sequel to it, Pyrrhos 
is the king who o-Trai/ifft woTi (cai TVfijSiopvxf'iv (Aigai) nai iepocrvXuv (Lokroi), 
Antigonos ojo-re napa to npoa-riKov (f)vya5fv(iv (his flight before Pyrrhos and his 
son). It is no doubt an up-to-date adaptation of a passage in Xenophon 
(Hense-, p. xxxvii), but Hense (p. xlvi) inclines to think it has come through 
Bion; and if the whole of Teles dates from cin: 240 (p. xxxvi) it is likely 
that this group of illustrations from the years 276-273 would be due to Bion 
rather than to Teles. 

'^* Ap. Strab. I, 15, olrju tK paKtav 6 Bicov (= Otf. iS, 74). 

^^ Teles, TT(p\ avTapKfias. See especially the opening phrase, repeated again 
at the beginning of irtp'i ntpicrTuafuv ; (5ej) t6v dyadov (w8pa o n av rrepi6fj 17 
Tvxi {Ka\S>s ay(jovi(e(T6ai). 


/manly form of morality ; a morality that we may call elemen- 
vRTy if we please, but that might well help some while it could 
harm none. Not to seek wealth or luxury ; to remember 
that it is as honourable to be faithful in little as in much, and 
that poverty never hindered the quest for wisdom ; to do 
your duty in the station of life in which you find yourself, and 
to be content ; to look for your happiness in yourself and in 
D"nothing outside 3'ourself. If the wind blow fair, no harm in 
T spreading your sails to it ; but should it change, then wrap 
3^ourself in your virtue and endure what fortune may send, 
and see to it that, if fortune must strike you down, she strike 
down a man and not a worm.^^ Something of this sort was 
Bion's message to his hearers : with what power delivered 
we may judge, not merely from the repute he left, but from 
such circumstances as these, that he persuaded the sailors of 
Rhodes to put on the student's cloak and follow him to his 
lecture-room,^" and that his words, two generations later, were 
still proverbs in Pella.^^ Something of his power, no doubt, 
was due to form ; he saw that the old-fashioned set speech 
had had its day, and that men wanted something livelier 
and more realistic. Ready to his hand lay the Diatribe ; 
and in the imaginary dialogue with an audience which the 
Cynics had invented he found the tool he wanted, and per- 
fected it.^^ He talked, not af, but as it were wt'fh his hearers ; 
and success followed the newer and homelier way. His 

^« See n. 58. " Diog. L. 7, 53. 

^^ Bion's words were dXX' ovv ye civBpa koI ov /3\o/<a (Teles, nepl dnadelas, 
p. 62, Hense^). Hense (p. cxxiv) is inclined to think that much of this comes 
from Bion, though elsewhere (p. li) he gives a warning that it is very 
doubtful. But he has not noticed the Polybios passage, which goes far to 
prove that the closing words, at any rate, are Bion's ; for a phrase which 
both has the place of honour in Teles and was also current at Pella cannot 
well, it would seem, be due to any one else. — Polyb. 16, 22, 4-5. Ptolemaios, 
son of Sosibios, went from Egypt to Macedonia to Philip V. Before he left 
Alexandria he was full of rv(l)os (see n. 70) ; but when he mixed with the 
young men of the Macedonian court, thinking that the Macedonian manli- 
ness (avSpda) consisted in the fashion of their clothes, he imitated this, and 
persuaded himself that he had thus become a man (civBpa), while the Alexan- 
drians remained dolts, worms (/3\aKay). Therefore avBpa ^\aKn was still 
a catch-phrase in Pella. — (It is quoted by Lucian, Bz's accus. 21, who puts 
into Epicurus' mouth the words avBpi>>'niva Ka\ ov ^XaxcoS?; (ppovT](Tas. This is 
given by Usener as fr. 402 ; but I apprehend from the context that it is not 
Epicurus but merely Lucian.) 

^' On Diatribe see Wilamowitz, Gn'ec/i. Lit., p. 98 seq. 


words, it is true, were not new. He was apt, as Menedemos 
said of him, to ' sla}^ the slain '.^'^ He was not one from whom 
new thoughts were to be expected, but rather one who cast 
existing thoughts into a form that brought them home to men 
arid made them remembered. His message itself was but the 
ultimate residue of the noble if deformed teaching of the 
Cynics, though shot with something of a warmer humanity. 
Yet, now and again, even our mangled tradition recalls some 
sentence which reveals Bion's own personality, the sort of 
flash in which Eratosthenes, who valued him highly, doubtless 
thought to seeTHe" genuine Odysseus. Such, for instance, is 
the statement that slaves if virtuous are truly free, while 
their masters if vicious are really slaves, a sentiment that, if 
Bion really uttered it, is worthy of Epictetus.^^ Such is his 
protest against the belief that heaven would visit the sins of 
the fathers upon the children.''^ But most striking of all are 
his few words about the d3'ing frog; the bo3^s stone it in 
sport, but the frog dies in simple earnest.^^ The very lim- 
pidity of the Greek phrasing serves but to reveal more clearly 
what lies beneath the surface, the germs of some such passion... 
of" pity as has been poured out on the same theme by a great 
modern poet.*'^ The man who, in the third century before 
Christ, could turn aside to pity a tortured reptile was, as the 
world went, a very strange and notable phenomenon.^^ 

Where B ion popularized , his young er, coni^iiip.n^f^''y TlmQn- 

denied. Timon~or~PElious, afterwards called the Sillogra- 
pher,^'' was a one-eyed man with a taste for gardening, who 
began life as a dancer on the stage, but later on attached him- 
self to Pyrrhon of Elis, the Sceptic, and eagerly adopted 
his teaching: nothing (so it ran) can be known; therefore 
never be definite about anything, but always suspend your 
judgement ; if you do this, you will escape worry, for impertur- 

"" Diog. L. 2, 135. 

•"'^ Stob. Flor. 2, 39 and 62, 42 (from Bion, wtpi SovXeiny). 

" Plut. J/or. 561 C. " lb. 965 B. 

"^ Victor Hugo, Le Cra^paud. 

*"'' But not quite a new one. His master Xenokrates noWa to)v d\nyu>v 
ffticov riXfd ; Ael. V. //. 13, 31. 

*" Life in Diog. L. 9, cap. 12. Suscmilil l, 109. Wachsmuth and Diels, 
op. c. (n. 39), give the fragments ; Uiels in numbering gives Wachsmuth's 
numbers in brackets. 


babilit}^ will follow as automatically as the shadow follows the 
body ; above all, remember that nothing is good or bad, just or 
unjust, and nothing matters, not even whether you live or die.*''' 
It does not seem a hopeful doctrine to sow broadcast over the 
world. Timon, however, who was an extremely able man, 
made it pay ; his studied indifference to pupils attracted them ; 
and though it should have been immaterial to him whether he 
lived or died, he did in fact on his wanderings make a suffi- 
cient amount of money to enable him to live very comfortably 
in Athens to a good old age ; there he illustrated the * imper- 
turbability' which his philosophy had taught him by profess- 
ing himself unable to work if the maid-servants made a noise 
in the house. ''^ 

tjejiiiew-both' P t olemy and Antigonos, and at one period 
of his life spent some time at Pella, where he used to help 
Alexander the Aetolian with the plots of his tragedies.^^ 
Timon indeed has perhaps a better right to be classed among 
the poets than among the philosophers ; for he wrote poetry 
of every sort, both for himself and for others, and his reputa- 
tion really rests on his Silloi. This most tantalizing poem, of 
which just enough remains to whet the reader's curiosity, 
was an elaborate skit on the philosophers, living and dead, 
the two that received the worst handling being Zeno and Ar- 
kesilaos. Zeno, taking his cue from the Cynics, had preached 
against Tv(f)o^ or Illusion ; and Timon retorted upon Zeno 
with interest. In his hands Illusion tends to become a catch- 
word, a phrase in which you sum up all that you dislike in 
those with whom you disagree. His master Pyrrhon alone 
escapes scot-free.''" The poem falls into three books : the 

'"'' This last from Epictetus ap. Sidb. F/or. 121,28, as a maxim of Pyrrhon. 

"* Diog. L. 9, 113. "^ lb. 1 10 and 113. 

"" As the meaning of tv^os bears on the character of Antigonos (n. 103), it 
is worth considering. — Illusion can be in two spheres : {a) on the intellectual 
side, resulting in a perversion of knowledge, Kanvos (f)i\o(TO(f)ias, false dogma- 
tism ; (d) on the ethical side, resulting in a perversion of character, false 
pride. After the Cynic Antisthenes launched the word on its interesting 
career (in a technical sense), by saying that arvcpin was the rfkos, his school 
do not appear to have kept to one meaning ; but, speaking roughly, they 
classed as rvcpos the ideals of the common man. Thus, though Krates, in 
frs. I and 8 (Diels), clearly means the illusion of knowledge, he as clearly 
in fr. 4, by his 'wine-dark sea of Illusion' that surrounds the plain living of 
the Cynic, means false pride ; and the latter is the meaning in the well-known 


first opens with the Battle of the Philosophers, and passes on 
to the Fishing of the Philosophers,'^ where Zeno, in the per- 
son of a greedy old Phoenician woman, sitting in a dark mist 
of the inevitable Illusion, angles in vain (for her weel is small 
and her stupidity great) for the shoal of swimming dialec- 
ticians, Menedemos, Diodoros, and Arkesilaos, led by the 
sreat Plato-fish himself."^ In Book II Timon descends to the 
Shades under the guidance of Xenophanes, the man of par- 
tial illumination (as Dante under the guidance of Vergil), and 
interviews the dead philosophers ; Book III deals with those 
yet living. The Silloi must, however, belong to a much later 
stage of Timon's hfe than his sojourn in Pella. 

But the Muse who found the best entertainment in Macedo- 
nia was Klio. History in the fourth century had paid the 
penalty ofher rapid rise in the fifth. At Athens she had sud- 
denly burst full-grown from her chrysalis of myth and logos, 
like the city goddess herself from the head of Zeus ; but the 
changing conditions of the world forbade another Herodotos, 
the limitations of human nature a second Thucydides. Unable 
to move forward, she had naturally moved back. The first 
glamour of youth was over, and men in the fourth century 
had become intoxicated with a new art, the art of putting 
words together. The teaching of Isokrates invaded the pro- 
vince of the writer no less than that of the speaker ; the thing 

story of Diogenes trampling upon Plato's Tvcfyo^ (Diog. L. 6, 26). This latter 
was the aspect in which Zeno handled the word ; he said navrav a-KpiiriffTfpov 
eipai Tov Tv(Pov (Amim 3i7 = Diog. L. 7, 22); intellectual error cannot be 
unbecoming, and the context is plain. Timon, unable to retort on Zeno by 
accusing him of false pride, assails him with the other meaning ; the ' rnist ' 
in which Zeno sits is the intellectual error of dogmatism. Both meanings 
continue to run on side by side ; to Timon, his master Pyrrhon alone is quite 
free of false dogmatism, «Tv0oy, fr. 9 (32), his guide Xenophanes partially free 
only, vnarvcfyos, fr. 60 (40); all others must have been condemned. To Bion, 
a small livelihood may be happy and profitable if false pn'ift' be absent 
(Teles, rre/H avrapK., fi(Tu . . . tirv^uiy) ; and the Cynic teachers, Krates and 
Diogenes, are <iTv(})oi.. In a certain sense, drvcpin is tending to become the 
virtue of one's friends, rvcpos the vice of one's enemies ; and nothing is a surer 
sign of the presence of the objectionable quality in oneself than to claim that 
one is free of it, as did Pyrrhon (Diels, p. 180, from Aristokles). In later 
literature we continue to get both senses; ethical in e.g. Polyb. 16, 22, 4, 
Strabo, 15, 6S6, Plut. Mor. 43 B ; intellectual in e.g. Polyb. 3, 81, I, Plut. 
A/or, 580c ; ambiguous e.g. Polyb. 3, 81, 9. 

■" I merely follow Diels liere. 

" Fr. 30 (7) TQiv TTui^iov 6' rjye iTorXariarTaKos ( = ' mullus praegrandis ', Diels, 
p. 183, and also ' Plato-fish '). 


became obscured by the symbol ; and if Ephoros was, in his 
way— let us grant this much to Polybios' appreciation — a con- 
siderable writer, he left behind him a bitter legacy, a school 
that cared to set down, not what had actually happened, but 
what sounded well. Histor}-, in the hands of the literary men, 
threatened to strangle herself in her own presentation and to 
degenerate into mere rhetoric. 

It was comparatively easy, and it gave pleasure ; and many 
literary men of the fourth and third centuries carried on the 
process with eagerness. Many of these historians had great 
merits ; they were often learned, they were often industrious, 
they often had definite theories of how history should be 
written ; but whether we turn to the purely Isokratean writers 
like Ephoros and Theopompos,"-^ or to the men of the new 
semi-poetical or Asianic style like Timaios, or to the school 
which, represented by Douris of Samos,"'* set out to vivify 
history by dramatizing it, we find, or think we find (for we 
are dealing with writers who are largely known to us only 
at second-hand), one common failing running through all their 
w^ork ; the ultimate aim is not truth, but effect. And if this 
was the case with the great writers, it was natural enough 
that their followers should reproduce their faults without their 
virtues ; the result was to be seen in men like the much-read 
Kleitarchos, whose work was no better than a second-rate 
historical novel. 

Polybios, in a well-known passage, laid it down that history 
w^ould be w^ell written when men of action were historians, 
or historians men of action. He desired, he said, that men of 
action should write history as of necessity, and not by the 
way. But in fact the men of action had already saved history. 
One of the many b3'-results of Alexander's career was that a 

'^ Douris, fr. i ; Ephoros and Theopompos avrov tov ypa(j>eiv novov eVf/xf- 
\ri6ria-av. See a very different estimate of Theopompos, however, by Wilamo- 
witz, Greek Historical Writing (trans. Gilbert Murray, 1908), which, 
however, seems partly to depend on the view that the Oxyrhynchos historian 
is Theopompos. 

'^ For a very high estimate of Douris, see Beloch 3, i, 492, who ranks him 
as more important than Hieronymos, and thinks that a large part of the 
material portions of Diodoros and Plutarch come from him. See contra 
E. Schwarz, ' Douris ' in P. IV. ; apart from Diodoros' Agathokles, we cannot 
say much about Douris' influence on the historical tradition. 


new s ort of historical writing appeared in the world, and the 
credit of it is due to Macedonia, and not to Greece ; for the 
Greeks who helped the Macedonians to start it either 
belonged to Macedonian cities or were in Macedonian ser- 
vice. What chiefly distinguishes it from the rhetorical 
schools is that it was, almost exclusively, written by men who 
had first lived through or played a part in the thing they 
wrote, and who afterwards wrote down the thing they knew. 
Probably their work was not popular, or much read ; the 
literary men, the rhetoricians, held the field. But it was an 
honest attempt toward the truth. 

The place of honour is due to the three men of Macedonia 
who, with the aid of the official documents, put down the true 
facts of Alexander's expedition as they had themselves seen 
it ; Ptolem}^ son of Lagos, afterwards king of Egypt, from the 
military side ; Aristoboulos of Kassandreia from the point of 
view of the geographer and ^thnokrgist; Nearchos. a Cretan 
by birth but settled in Amphipolis, who told the story of the 
fleet which he had himself commanded. Alexander's career 
was quickly enough obscured by the usual clouds of rhetoric 
and miracle-mongering ; and but for these three men, and 
the practical Roman soldier from Bithynia who had the good 
sense to use their writings, we should know little enough of 
Alexander. jv 

Antigonos himself, on each side, came of a family that had •] 
numS^f^d" historians amongst its members. Marsyas of 
. Pella, half-brother or nephew of the elder Antigonos, had 
commanded Demetrios' centre at Salamis and written a his- 1 
tory of Macedonia." Antipatros the Regent ha d, written^ [' 
history of the Illyrian wars of the Macedonian king Perdikkas, 
and had also published two volumes of his own correspon- 
dence,"^^ which must have formed a valuable quarry for Hiero-|A 
nymos. Above all, Krateros, Antig onos' half-brother, produfiedf 
a work both of great value in itself and astoundingly modernlf 
in conception ; he collected from the Athenian archives, and 
published, the Athenian decrees from the earliest times to his 
own day, illustrating them with the necessary commentary. 

"" Susemihl I, 533. On the relationship, Beloch 3, 2, 89. 
'"• Suidas, 'AvTiTTuTpos. 

R 2 




It formed, in fact, a history of Athens based on epigraphic 
mat^ial. Naturally, his judgement was not always correct ; 
~"higTs said to have occasionally inserted spurious matter, such 
as the draft of a treaty which had never been completed. But 
it was regarded as noteworthy if he ever gave a fact without 
citing either a decree of the Assembly or a judgement of the 
Court in support of it ; and the loss of such a work ma}^ be 
heartily deplored."'^ Whether the actual priority in the study 
of inscriptions belongs to him or to Philochoros cannot be 
decided ; both the Macedonian prince and the Athenian 
antiquary were precursors of that most learned_epigraphist 
of the next century, Polemon of Ilion. 

"Itjwas only fitting, then, that at Antigonos' court the out- 
standing literary figure should be a historian : and though 
rfiGTOnyriios, in all probability, only wrote at the end of his 
active career, that career may be briefly referred to here ; 
itrrttTTot "only illustrates the possibilities, ahke of adventure 
antJoT power, which lay open to the Greek in the new world, 
but it also brings before us the best type of the new school of 
historian who had himself played his part in that world. 

Hieronymos of Kardia '* was a Greek of the Thracian 
Chersonese, a fellow-countryman of Eumenes, whose fortunes 
he followed. He shared in the siege of Nora, and went as 
envoy for Eumenes to Antipatros, on which occasion the old 
Antigonos attempted to win him over. At Gabiene, where 
Eumenes was taken, Hieronymos was found among the 
wounded, and kindly treated by Antigonos, whose service 
he afterwards entered, remaining thenceforth a loyal adherent 
of the Antigonid house. In 312 Antigonos gave him a special 

" F. H. G. ii, 617 ; Susemihl i, 599 ; Beloch 3, i, 495 ; W. Larfeld, Hand- 
buch d. griech. Epig7-ap]nk, vol. i, 1907, p. 21, who concludes that the writer 
ivas the Macedonian prince. — On his care to cite either a ^rjcpiafia or a Si/07, 
Plut. Arist. 26. — On his admission of dvTiypa(f)a (Tvv6r]Kcov ws- yevofxivuiv (where 
dpTiypa(pa clearly means, not copies, which would give no sense, but drafts 
that were never completed), Plut. A7w. 13, 5. 

'^^ F. Reuss, Hienmynios vo?i Kardia ; Susemihl i, 560 ; Beloch 3, I, 491, 
cf. 3, 2, 3 seq. ; Wilamowitz, Griech. Lit., p. 105 (with special appreciation of 
his truthfulness) ; H. Nietzold, Die Uberliefej'itng der Diadochoi-Geschichte 
bis ztir ScJilacht bet Jpsos, 1905 (not seen); F. Reuss in Woch. Ki, Phil. 
1905, 1389, reviewing Nietzold, and in Jali?-esbefic/it, 1909 ; J. B. Bury, The 
Ancient Greek Historians, 1909. 


commission as governor of the Dead Sea,"^ as part of a very 
peculiar scheme for putting pressure on Ptolemy. From the 
Dead Sea came all the bitumen used in Eg3'pt in embalming 
the dead ; this substance rose to the surface and floated there 
in great blocks, and was collected by the local Arabs, whose 
tribes fought violently with each other for the lucrative fisher}^ 
They had no boats, but put out on rafts made of reeds, each 
carrying three men ; two were to row and collect the bitumen, 
while the third carried a bow to repel enemies. Antigonos, 
or Demetrios, conceived the idea of cornering the supply of 
bitumen, a proceeding which, if successfully carried out, must 
have caused great religious excitement in Egypt and reacted 
unfavourably on Ptolemy; and Hieronymos' commission was 
to build boats and collect all the available bitumen into one 
place.*"' The Arabs, however, were in no mind to lose their 
gainful trade ; the}^ put out in thousands on their reed rafts 
and assailed the boats with arrows. This weird struggle on 
the malodorous lake ended in a complete victory for the 
Arabs, and the project of cornering bitumen fell through. 

Whether Hieronymos was really satrap of Syria also may 
be doubted.^^ But it is probable that he fought b}' Demetrios' 
side at Salamis, and that it is to him that we owe our under- 
standing account of that great victory ; perhaps, too, the pic- 
ture of Demetrios himself in action, an inspiring figure on the 
poop of his great galley, bestriding his three fallen armour- 
bearers and taking his joy, like any hero of Homer, in the 
spear-play and the crash of the bronze-shod beaks. ^^ He cer- 
tainly fought in the battle of the kings at Ipsos, and remained 
true to Demetrios after that catastrophe.L in 2Q':^ Demetr ios\ 
made him governor of Boeotia — He continued -to Tia'^ at 
QonataV court, and perhaps accompanied^ the _.kijpig _in the, 
war against Pyrrhos, though he must have been nearly eighty 
at the time. Like Aristoboulos and Polybios and many another, 

" Diod. 19, 98-100. 

^ lb. 19, 100, 2. — There was of course bitumen in Babylonia; also near 
Apollonia, Ael. V.//. 13, 16; but Egypt was supplied from the Dead Sea, 
Diod. 19, 99, 3. 

*' The only authority is Josephus, c. Apion. 1050 E. 

"^ That the excellent naval items of this part of Diodoros are probably 
from Hieronymos, see ch. 3, n. i"]. But it may be doubtful if this applies to 
the picture of Demetrios. 


he lived first and only wrote when his active career was over ; 
"~it is said thatln spite oi'tHe great exertions of his life, and his 
many wounds, he Hved to be 104, and kept all his faculties to 
the end. 

He wrote the history of the two generations that followed 
Alexander, the Successors and their sons, the Diadochoi and 

~fhe Epigonoi ; he himself lived through both. His history 
forms a large part of the foundation of everything that we 
now know about the period which it covers.*^^ His outlook was 
a wide one ; he was the first to give to the Greek world a 
sketch (introduced into the chapters on Pyrrhos) of the early 
history of Rome.*^^ Though a partisan of the Antigonids, it is 
supposed that he dealt faithfully with both the elder Anti- 
gonos and Demetrios, concealing neither their harshness nor 
their greed of power.^"' There were some who reproached 
him with representing Gonatas in too favourable a light ; but 
the writer who relates this carries little weight as a historical 
critic, and had evidently not read Hieronymos himself, for he 
gives the statement merely as common report.*^*^ As such it 
is of little value; and the possibility always remains that 
Ijieronymos spoke well of Gonatas because that was in accord 

/with facts. In reality it is not known at all what he thought 
or wrote of the king ; all evidence is lost. But what the king 
thought of Hieronymos can be guessed ; for his only recorded 
writing was a series of letters addressed to the historian, in 
which (among other things) he gave some account of the 
literary circle of which both had been members.^"^ Clearly 

^^ He may be the basis at first hand of Arrian's Diadochoi, and is in large 
part (not of course at first hand) that of Plutarch's Lives of Eumenes, 
Demetrios, and Pyrrhos. As to Diodoros, there is much discussion as to 
how Hieronymos was used and with what intermediaries. Certainty may 
never be attained ; but it is admitted anyhow that he counts for much in 
Diodoros' books i8 to 20, the excellence of which is unquestioned ; see 
E. Schwartz, ' Diodoros ' in P. IV., col. 684. 

^* Dion. Hal. Anf. Rom. i, 6. 

*^ Reuss, Hieronymos, p. 108. 

^•^ Paus. I, 9, 8, cf. I, 13, 9. Note Pausanias' ex^' ^oiav. it is merely 
a case of 'they say', and of little value. The definite statement that 
Hieronymos hated Lysimachos may well be true; he was an officer of De- 
metrios, and also Lysimachos had destroyed his native city, Kardia. But 
the story of Lysimachos (i.e. his Thracians) rifling the tombs of Pyrrhos' 
ancestors is not the absurdity that Pausanias supposes ; Pyrrhos afterwards 
allowed his Gauls to do just the same thing at Aigai. 

^^ Third Life of Aratos ; wy airos (ftrjaiv 6 'Avrlyovos iv tois np6s Upawnov. 


j ijgrony nios was one whom he dehghted to honour. That — 

the historian, too, was interestedin those philosophic questions 
which appealed to the king is shown by the comparative fre-jj ^ / 
quency with which Hieronymos appears as a source in later r""^ 
philosophic hterature.*- 

Hieron3-mos' primary aim was truth, the recording of what 
real!y~3id happen. This aim he achieved in full measure; 
the trustworthiness of his narrative was unquestioned. But 
though his matter was good, he had no gift of st^'le ; he was 
said to be dry, and he did not attract readers. When read at all 
he was read at second or third hand ; thus scarcely the most 
trifling fragment of his actual words can be identified as 
having survived, though something of the substance of what 
he wrote can be gathered from three of the best of Plutarch's 
Lives and the material portions of three very excellent books 
of Diodoros. He differs somewhat from most third-century 
writers, such as Ptolemy I or Aratos of Sikyon ; their careers 
were more important than their writings; with Hieron3'mos \i 
the historian overshadows the man. And the pit}^ of it is that, 
to himself, he was a soldier and a statesman, and only turned 
historian in old age ; consequently he taught no pupils, and 
left no successor ; true understanding of the history of Mace- 
donia ends with his death. That he was a great historian 
we can dimly see. It is difficult to speak with much con- 
fidence of the place of one whose work is onl}- known to us 
through the use made of it by others ; but it has been sug- 
gested, not unreasonably, that had that work survived we 
might to-day be including Hieron3'mos as third in a trium- 
virate of Greek historians with Polybios and Thucj'dides.^' 

At the cen tre of the society here sketched stood the king 
himself.^" He was about forty-three years old at the time of his 
marriage to Phila;'^ he had one haCufal son, Harky oneus,^^^ 

*" Cronert, Kolotes und Mcucdcnios, p. 28. 

"' Bury, of), c, p. 177. 

'*' Droysen's famous portrait, HeUenisnius^, iii. i, 206, remains perhaps the 
best and truest appreciation of Antigonos. See also Kaerst, ' Antigonos,' 
no. 4 in/", jr. ; Niese, ii, 223 ; Beloch 3, i, 590 ; and especially Wilamowitz, 
Antii^ofios, pp. 211, 212. 

"' Phila was, at least, something over twenty years younger than himself. 
She was alive in 246/5 ; see ch. 13, n. 60. 

** Halkyoneus was grown up and holding high command in 273. His 


born many years since, and brought up as a prince of the blood, 
who three 3^ears later was old enough to be holding high com- 
mand in tlie army. As kingof Macedonia Antigonos married 
one wife and no more, a natural reaction against the excesses 
of Demetrios. But the scanty details of his private life are 
really immaterial to history. That he took pleasure in the 
feast and the wine-cup ^^ is merely to say that he was a Mace- 
donian king ; it was a matter of course that it should be so. 
The Macedonian of the third century was fond of huge 
banquets,^'* and expected that his king should get drunk on 
the proper occasions, as Philip and Alexander had done. 
The record still remains of how Philip literally drank himself 
into the good graces of the hard-riding Thessalian land- 
owners.''^ Even in Greece a ' water-drinker ' was as great an 
oddity as he would have been among English squires in the 
eighteenth century.^^ But these things were merely for the 
time of relaxation ; the first Antigonos, and even Demetrios, 

niothei' was an Athenian hetaira, Demo (Ptolemaios of Megalopolis ap. 
Athen. 13, 578 a) ; but all the stories show him being treated precisely as crown 
prince. Now the third-century evidence was that Demo was Antigonos' 
epofxevT], and that Demetrios I had an tpcoMeV/; called Mania (Ptolemaios, /. ^.), 
a nopvr] whose real name was Melissa (Machon ap. Athen. 578 b, with details) ; 
and it seems clear to me that Plutarch's source here (not Hieronymos) in the 
life of Demetrios has wrongly identified Mania with Demo, who in the third- 
century evidence are two different people, and that Plutarch's stories really 
relate to Mania, and not to Demo, who was never Demetrios' ipaixivrj ; the 
identification of the two probably rests on some such worthless rubbish as 
that given by Herakleides Lembos ap. Athen. 578 a (second century), which 
is self-contradictory and does not even merit refutation. 

^^ Persaios' account of a state banquet of Antigonos, Athen. 13, 607 c seq., 
and see next note. Zeno rebukes Antigonos for getting drunk, Arnim 
289= Ael. V.H. 9, 26. — It does not appear after which Antigonos the wine- 
cup called avTLyovis (Ath. il, 7836, 497 f) was named. 

"* Description of the wedding feast of the Macedonian Karanos, given by 
the Macedonian Hippolochos (Athen. 4, i28a-l3od). Hippolochos had 
a taste for this sort of thing, and described Karanos' orgy to his friend 
Lynkeus (brother of Douris the historian), who lived in Athens, in return for 
a letter from the latter describing a banquet called Aphrodisia which Anti- 
gonos had given there (Susemihl i, 487 and 881). Both banquets probably 
belong to the time when Antigonos was crown prince, and a section of 
Athenian society was flattering Demetrios by references to Phila Aphrodite. 
— When, however, Dion Chrysostom {Or. 33, § 26) says that Macedonia, 
like Sybaris, &c., perished of luxury, I take his moralizing to refer to the 
Macedonian race generally, in Asia and Egypt. Macedonia itself seems 
never to have been wealthy. 

»5 Theopompos Fr. 178 {F. H.G.l, p. 308). 

^^ See ch. 7, n. 127. At least two philosophers of this century, Theophrastos 
and Hieronymos of Rhodes, wrote on drunkenness. 


kept business and pleasure separate, and never drank on 

The portrait of Antigonos' features that is most hkely to 
resemble him must have been taken at a somewhat later time, 
probably after the fall of Athens.^* It shows a plain, straight- 
forward sort of face, thoughtful, but far from good-looking ; 
save for a somewhat similar projection of the rounded chin, it 
bears no resemblance to the handsome features of Demetrios. 
Antigonos in fact scarcely inherited anything from his father 
at all save family loyalty ; he possessed neither his genius 
nor his failings. What he did possess was a dogged tenacity, 
surpassing that of either the first Antigonos or Antipatros, a 
tenacity which rose above both good fortune and evil, which 
had brought him to the throne, and \vas to take him much 
further ; he was to be a signal illustration of the superiority 
of character to talent. 

Among the moralists of a later time, Antigonos used to be 
quoted as a proof of the thesis that the sins of the fathers are 
not always visited upon the children : the worthy son of a 
worthless father, they concluded, can escape the punishment 
of the race, even as Antigonos, good offspring of a bad root, 
escaped the penalty due to the sins of Demetrios. ^^ If one is 
to appeal to heredity, it might be equally -true to put it that 
he reaped the reward due to the virtues of his mother Phila. 
But Antigonos himself was Stoic enough to believe that a 
man stood on his own feet, and was what he made himself.^"" 
' Without illusions and without enthusiasms, with little gift of 
attracting men, knowing quite well that he was not a heaven- 
sent general or statesman, he nevertheless won through at the 
end with almost everything that he meant to do, partly because 
of his inflexible determination to do it, partly because he 
possessed the old Greek virtue of moderation, ^"^ the only 
quality (so Aristotle had said) which could hold a kingdom 
together;^"- he could distinguish the things that were possi- 

" Plut. Dem. 19. 

"* See ch. 7, n. 20, and frontispiece. 

»" Plut. Mot: 562 F. See n. 47 (c). '<^ See notes 46 and 47 (a). 

"^ Plut. Mot: 545 B, fiiTpioi. 

^'^'- Aristot. Po/. 1313 a. Probably he had the Macedonian kingdom in 
view (Newman). 


ble from the things that were chimaeras. Moderation was 
not a virtue that he could have learnt from his Stoic teachers, 
or anywhere but in the school of life itself; but Zeno had 
taught him one of his highest lessons, to be free from the 
great Ilkision, false pride.^"'' Whether he also acquired from 
his Stoic friends his capacity to bear misfortune with dignity 
and calmness^""* may be doubted: more probably his mind 
here ran on parallel lines with theirs. His kindliness and 
generosity are frequently noticed.^"'' 

He appears to have hated shams. This was one element 
of his enmity to Pyrrhos, and of his obvious knowledge that 
in the long run it must be Pyrrhos and not himself that must 
go under. It was not always possible for a king to prevent 
the worst sham of all, his worship as a god. His own realm, 
indeed, he could control ; and Antigonos had no occasion to 
consider the question of a State worship of himself, in which 
so many of the kings from Alexander downward had found 
a wonderful instrument of statecraft. But if an independent 
community desired to render to a king divine honours, it was 
not easy to stop them from doing so ; and few kings in fact 
desired to stop them. But it may be recorded of Antigonos, 
to his honour — and of him almost alone among kings of the 
time of Macedonian blood — that, so far as is known, he was 
never worshipped by anybody.^"'^ 

This side of his character can be illustrated from some of 

^"^ Antigonos is twice called iirvcfins, each time in a passage that relates to 
character and not to intellect; Plut. Alor. 545 B, nTv(f)os /cui fiirpios; Ael. 
V. H. 2, 20 (see n. 122), npaov koi aTv(})ov; and see the context in each case. 
Referring to n. 70 on the double meaning of rO^o?, it is clear that the Tv(f)os 
from which Antigonos was free was false pride. 

'"■' Meya\o({)p6vu)s ; Plut. Mor. 1 19 c. 

^°® e. g. toward Kleanthes, whose poverty he relieved (Diog. L. 7, 169) ; 
toward Bion, p. 235 ; toward Pyrrhos' son Helenos, Plut. Pyrrh. 34 ; Just. 25, 
5, 2. He is wpaos, Ael. V.//. 2, 20. Cf. Bion on Antigonos, Teles, nepl 
alrnpKtias, 1. 8. 

""^ On the supposed evidence to the contrary' see App. 5, p. 435. — The 
fact that he used his own features for Pan on his coins does not mean that 
he thought himself Pan ; if so, Demetrios in like case (see C. T. Seltman, 
A^uw. Chro7i. 1909, p. 267, n. 3) must have thought he was Pallas Athene. — 
I believe, in spite of all that has been said to the contrary, that the plain 
man of the time was perfectly clear as to the distinction, in this connexion, 
of 6i6s and nv6pa)Tros. Else why did Antipatros take the risk involved in 
refusing to worship Alexander, da-f^es tovto Kplras ? 


the anecdotes told about him ;^°'^ it will suffice to select two 
that are undoubtedly true.^*'* One is the snub, half brutal 
half humorous, which he bestowed on the wretched poet who 
had addressed him as 'god', — 'the slave of the bed-chamber 
doesn't think so',^"^ The other is not quite so obvious. 
While he was besieging a town a certain philosopher insisted 
on reading him a treatise on justice. It is, fortunately, pos- 
sible to reconstruct the text on which the learned man was 
preaching ; it was the old saying, scorned in its time, but 
again taken up and rehabilitated by Aristotle, that 'justice is 
the good of my neighbour' ; and the king turned on him with 
' How can you prate to me of justice and my neighbour's good 
when you find me assaulting my neighbour's city ? ' Did 
then Antigonos not beheve in justice, and hold with Epicurus' 
comment (hardly made in earnest), that one set to administer 
justice was a fool not to take his neighbours goods when he 
had the power ? Antigonos in reality knew far more about 
justice than that philosopher probably did ; he once, in reply to 
one who said everything was just for kings, had answered 
that nothing was just for kings but what was just in itself: 
but he could not restrain the savage impatience of the man of 
action, the man who has got to do something in a position 

'"" On the lengths of the reigns of the three kings called Antigonos (that 
of Gonatas being far the longest), and the law of chances, a number of the 
anecdotes merely labelled ' Antigonos ' must refer to Gonatas, as well as 
those expressly assigned to him ; and any which relate to philosophical 
questions are sure to do so. Of Plutarch's Apophthegmata, under 'Ai/Ti-yoi/ov, 
Nos. 7 (= Plut. Mor. 360 c, see J.H.S. 1909, p. 268), 8 (which involves 
discussion of the point referred to in note liol, and 17 (from the appearance 
of Antagoras), certainly belong to Gonatas. Of the stories in Polyaen. 4, 6, 
Nos. 1,3, 17, 18 are Gonatas without question. The only uncertain one here 
is No. 2. It comes between two Gonatas stories, and for this reason Melber 
gave it to Gonatas with a query ; on internal evidence it might also, perhaps, 
suit Antigonos I. Of those in Stobaeus' F/orilegium, 7, 20 and 49, 20 seem 
certainly to be Gonatas, from the contents (see note 117), while 49, 20 has 
two definite parallels in language; paKos recalls Bion (note 47 f), (ttI Konplns 
Gonatas himself {Xacrnfocpopos of Plut. Jlfor. 360 c). 

'"** Whether any particular story or saying is true or not can never be 
decided subjectively ; our business is to look for the allusion, the quotation, 
the parallel in philosophic literature. I may illustrate this by referring to 
notes 47 and 110, ch. 10, n. 107, and /. H.S. 1909, p. 268. The Antigonos 
sayings have never, to my knowledge, been investigated, except the single 
case in Hense, Te/es', p. Ixxxviii. 

'"'■' Ov roiavTu fxoi 6 \n(Tavo(f)6f)(is (TvvoiSfv. See _/. //. .5". I909t P* 268. The 
point evaporates in polite translation. 


perhaps every way impossible, at the easy periods of the man 
of books, the man who had not got to grips with reahty. 
There is no truer bit of human nature in Plutarch.^''' 

In pohtics, his steady determination was the dominant 
factor. Through good fortune and evil he had held firmly to 
the belief that he was to be king of Macedonia ; and he was 
king. We shall see the same quality in his wars with Egypt ; 
we see it again, perhaps even more clearl}^, in the history of 
his successors. It took him many years to win the allegiance 
of the Macedonians ; once won, it was won for ever. Not the 
worst excesses of his grandson ever shook their loyalty to the 
dynasty; and even after their two great and unequal struggles 
with Rome, that power never felt safe from pretenders claim- 
ing kinship with the beloved house until she had carved up 
and dismembered the land in a fashion practised upon no 
other nation. 

Beside determination stood a truly Stoic sense of duty, a 
quality inherited in part, no doubt, through his mother from 
Antipatros. It showed itself of course clearly in the general 
measures taken for the good of the country, and in the 
resolve to be a Macedonian and not a Greek king : it showed 
itself in a number of smaller ways. He took the work of a 
king seriously : unlike Demetrios, he made himself readily 
accessible to his people ; ^^^ it is probably to him that the 
story relates of a king who had complete records compiled of 

"" Plut. Mor. 330 E. Certainly Gonatas, as he is called 6 yepcoi^ {J.H.S. 
1909, p. 268). He said d^eXrepos it OS opSav fie ras dWorpiai iroXeis rinrrovra 
Xe'yfiy nepl diKaioavvr)s, TiiTTTOprn in this sense is unique, according to Steph. 
Byz. ; this, and the scansion, show that Antigonos is quoting bits of two 
iambic lines. The strange nXXorpi'nr, therefore, whether it be the original 
adjective or whether, as I imagine, Antigonos has substituted it, must refer 
to what the ' sophist ' was saying, as it is the point of the sentence. His text, 
then, was dWorpiov dya66v T] SiKaioavvt], a saying attacked by Thrasymachos 
(Plato, 7\e/>. 343 c), and set up again by Aristotle, Ei/i. EH(le)n. 5, i, 17 and 
6, 6. — We know that discussion of this was in the air. Bion parodied it 
with TO KaWos dVKoTpiov dyaQov (Diog. L. 4, 48) ; Epicurus' comment is given 
by Arrian, Epidei. Diss, iii, 7, 11 (p. 322 of Usener's Epicurus). — Antigonos 
on dUma, Plut. Afor. 182 c, no. 8. — Aristotle's dictum involved this, that 
justice was the good of all the citizens (A. C. Bradley in Hellenica, p. 230). 
If we compare this with Antigonos' own theory of kingship (see p. 256), we 
see that he would probably have agreed. — To suppose (as has been done) 
that in Plut. Mor. 330 E Antigonos was talking mere cynicism, in the modern 
sense, is superficial. 

"^ Ael, V. H. 2, 20, drjiJLOTiKos. 


all who came to him on embassies or other State affairs, and 
astonished them upon their introduction by his knowledge 
both of themselves and of their business.^^- But Antigonos 
indeed went far beyond details of administration ; for it was 
he who laid down the highest view of kingship that the 
ancient world ever saw.^^^ ^ 

Most of Alexander's successors were frankly usurpers. 
Their justification was their ability ; they were the right men 
in the right places. But however well the Lagid or the 
Seleukid might govern, he governed his country for himself, 
as his domain ; and when he sought some theoretic base for 
his power — a power that had in fact no theoretic base at all 
— he could only find it on the religious side, in the worship 
accorded to him by his subjects. ^^* 

Strictly speaking, Antigonos needed no theoretic base for 
his power at all. It was sufficient that he had become the 
legitimate national king of an ancient monarchical country. 
This enabled him to put away, once and for all, all question 
of a state worship of himself. But though he was now a 
legitimate national king, he had become such entirely through 
his own effort and abilities. He answered exactly to the 
description of a Successor; he had found no hereditary 
realm or lawful succession waiting for him ; he had won 
his kingdom on the field of Lysimacheia, by his own right 
hand, and held it at present by administering its affairs with 
intelligence.^^^ It was largely an accident that the ancient 
customs of the country he ruled had enabled the Macedonians 

"^ Polyaen. 4, 6, 2, if it be Gonatas ; see n. 107. 

"^ In what follows, to the end of the chapter, I have drawn freely on 
Kaerst's brilliant work, Studien zitr Entwickehing utid theoretischen Be- 
gri(nduni^ der Monarchie ivi Altertum (ch. 3 and 4). But I have rearranged 
the ideas ; and when I come to Antigonos' own contribution I have reluc- 
tantly to part company with Kaerst altogether. There is also much that is 
valuable in R. Pohlmann, ' Die Entstehung des Ciisarismus' {Aits Altertum 
und Gegcnwart, 1895 ! omitted from the 2nd ed., 191 1, as being substan- 
tially incorporated in the 4th ed. of his Grimdriss d. griech. Gcschithte). 

^'^ The position of the rj)iadochoi is given by Suidas, ^acriXeia (2). Kaerst 
attributes this passage to historic rather than philosophic literature. 

'"' This sentence corresponds to four points of the ordinary 8td5o;^oj as 
given by Suidas, /. c, ovre (pvais (hereditary realm) ovre to diKaiov (lawful 
succession) (iTroBidovai to'h uudjioinon Tui fSna-iXfUis, uWa rots Swafxevoii i)y(l- 
aOai aTfiaTOTTfduv (Lysimacheia) kuI )(^(ipi((iv npay^jLara vovvex'^^ (intelligent 


to confer on him a kingship valid in law. It might have been 
othenvise ; it was somewhat of an accident that he had 
become a national king, rather than a king of the type of 
Ptolemy. Antigonos fully recognized his own share in the 
matter by the foundation of his games Basileia in honour of 
his own kingship, and perhaps by the change he made in the 
method of dating State documents.^^*^ But though he meant 
to be a national king in every sense, and recognized that he 
had a sure basis of rule in his election by the Macedonians, 
the part he had played in bringing about his own kingship 
reinforced the desire he already felt, a desire inevitable from 
his philosophic training and surroundings, that that kingship 
should justif}^ itself in the sight of philosophy, and should 
have some theoretic basis not at variance with the highest 
thought of the time. 

Many trains of thought contributed to form this basis, and 
can be partially traced. There was first the Cynic view. 
The common herd must have a master ; but that master must 
take as his ideal the Cj^nic hero Herakles, the superman toil- 
ing and suffering incessantly to drive evil out of the world. 
Kingship then was a hard thing to its possessor, bringing 
him pain and not pleasure, evil things rather than good. 
Antigonos, like many other kings, felt this to the full ; you 
cannot, he said, get any great good without great hardship : 
and if men knew all the troubles that clung to the rag called 
a diadem, none would stoop to pick it up if it lay on the 
dunghill at their feet.^^'^ But this was one side onl}^ 

Then there was a Stoic view. Kings need render no 
account and submit to no restraint ; to get a good king, then, 
you must have the best man possible, for the decision in 
things good and bad rests with him, and an inferior man will 
not understand what to do, or act conformably to the Law 
that orders the universe.^^'* The best man possible is the 
wise man, the philosopher ; but as a practical matter you do 
not find philosophers at the head of States. The next best 

"^ The games ; ch. 7, n. 18. — Kassandros had dated by some priesthood ; 
under Antigonos the king's regnal year was used ; ch. 7, n. 56. 

"■^ Stob, Flor. 7, 20 and 49, 20. See note 107. It is of course a common 
sentiment ; see Boson's reputed words, Just. 28, 3, 13. 

■^'* Suid. jSacriXcta (l) ; Chrysippos ap. Diog. L. 7, 122. 


thing, then, is that the philosopher, if he does not actually 
rule, shall stand behind the chair of the ruler and advise. ^^'' 
This, too, Antigonos fully met ; Persaios had come to him as 
his philosophic director, and wrote for him, as Euphantos had 
done before, a treatise on kingship. 

But there was still something wanting. The toil of the 
king, and the direction of the philosopher, were insufficient 
unless apphed to the right end. Again the Stoic philosophy 
intervened. There were in the world enlightened monarchs 
who worked hard, but who had gone astray by treating their 
states as their private domains. Their exactions in the way 
of taxes were, said the Stoic, little better than those of a 
tyrant ; men were forced to pay. Taxation should be by con- 
sent ; for the true king must remember that the goods of his 
people were not his; the true view must rather be that .king- 
ship is the possession of the State.^^" 

We cannot tell when the Stoics voiced this rather startling 
phrase, or in what temporal relation it stands to Antigonos' 
own view. But, even if the unnamed Stoic preceded Anti- 
gonos, he did not go the whole way. He was thinking chiefly 
oi property. One thing, however, followed from his utterance : 
Stoicism condemned the ordinary Hellenistic kingdom, and 
declared with no uncertain sound that the king of her choice 
must think, not of his rights, but of his duties.^-^ And it was 
from the point of view of duty that Antigonos started, when 
he went as far as it is possible to go on the path so marked 

"^ Chrysippos ap. Pint. Mor. 1043 c, a-u/i^iwo-erat ^auCkt'i. For other 
passages see Kaerst, I.e., p. 71, n. 2. 

'^° Suidas, ^(laiXda (3), a most valuable bit of Stoic or Stoic-Cynic teaching ; 
Kaerst, /.C, p. 59 seq. — Tas a-vv Xo-yw zeal (^ikai'djiUiiTia t(ov eia-0opo)j' aiTaiTi](Tfis, 
as opposed to exactions, is uncommonly near taxation with consent of the 
taxed. — "On 17 [^amXeln Krrj^a tmv Kotvoyv' «X\' ov ra 8r)fj.6(na t^st jUacriXdas 
KTTjiiaTa (as the Diadochoi treated them). Whether the first phrase comes 
earlier in time than Antigonos' saying or not, it does not go nearly as far. 
It might, for instance, be satisfied by (e. g.) the rights claimed by the people 
of Epeiros to depose a king who misbehaved. 

'-' See Pohlman, I.e., p. 287. — 'The ?>cnch Revolution proclaimed the 
Rights of Man, but this is not enough. . . . One day we shall begin to pro- 
claim the Duties of Man. In Article 48 of the Convention for the peaceful 
settlement of international disputes the word " duty" has, at the suggestion 
of France, been inserted for the first time in an international agreement.' 
Baron d'Estournelles de Constant, in a paper communicated to the first 
Universal Races Congress, London, lyil {Intcrraeial Problems, ed. G. 
Spiller, p. 384). 



out for a king, and put the coping-stone on that which the 
philosophers were building. The occasion was that his son 
had misused some of his subjects, and Antigonos, gently 
enough, rebuked him and said, * Do you not understand, boy, 
that our kingship is a noble servitude ? ' Of the meaning of 
the words no doubt is possible, for the context is eloquent. 
That which the Stoic had partially, but only partially, 
envisaged in theory, Antigonos translated into personal fact ; 
the king must be the servant of his people.^^^ The theoretic 
basis of kingship was found in the duty of service. We are 
familiar now with kings who have made this their highest 
aim ; perhaps only those who have some shght acquaintance 
with the ancient world can realize to what extent it was a 
new conception in the third century before ChriSf. Kings no 
doubt had sought the good of their people before Antigonos, 
just as men had done their duty before the Stoics taught; but 
Antigonos is the first known to us who laid down, as a rule 
of practice, that principle which was thenceforth held to mark 
a kingly soul, and which we still consider an ideal. 

^^" Ael. V. H. 2, 20, 6pu)v Tov viov toIs inTrjKooii xpai^ivov ^laiorepov re Koi 
Bpaavrepov "ovk olcrda'' eiirev, " S) nal, ti]v jSacriXeinv fjucou ei'do^ov eivai ^ovXtinvj" 
It goes on, that whoever does not recognize that this was spoken in love of 
the people {(piXavOpuinois) does not know a kingly man from a tyrant. — <Pi\av- 
6pd)7T(os, cf. (pi'KavdpoyTTia of the true (Stoic) king in Suidas, ^iao-iXei'a 3, i.e. 
love of that section of humanity committed to the monarch's care, K^Se/xofta 
in Suidas, /. ^. (on which Kaerst, /. ^., p. 60, n. i).- — Aelian seems to have 
a bit of philosophic literature here ; cf. the parallels with Suidas, ISaa-iXda 3. 
— That the Antigonos is Gonatas is unquestioned ; Doson had no son, and 
TTpaos and nrvcpos could not be applied to Antigonos I, who, moreover, does 
not figure in Stoic literature. And the son's act suits Halkyoneus, Plut. 
Pynh. 34. — As to the meaning, I cannot follow Kaerst. He takes hovKe'ia 
to mean that kingship is a burden, and says we must fioi take the view that 
it means service; so again in his Gesch. d. hell, Zeitaliers, ii, i, p. 317, it is 
a burden, to be taken up out of a sense of duty toward those entrusted to the 
king's care. Antigonos did think kingship a burden, as I have shown. But 
in this passage the natural meaning is the right one, as the context shows 
beyond any possibility of doubt. Antigonos could not rebuke his son for 
violence by saying ' kingship is a heavy burden ' ; it would have no meaning. 
The sense imperatively demanded is ' kingship is service\ 



The peace of the world was not destined to last. In the 
j'ear 275/4 two events happened, of crucial importance for 
the time that followed ;,£tolemy II married his sister Arsinoe, 
Keraunos' widow, and Pyrrhos ^ returned from Italy. 

Pyrrhos, because of his well-known war with Rome, has 
often been treated as a typical Hellenistic monarch. In fact, 
n.0 one could have been less representative of his time than 
the king of Epeiros. All his Macedonian contemporaries, 
without exception, were men who cared strongly for learning 
or letters in some form or other ; great fighters and great 
administrators, they all agreed in this, that it was no small 
part of the business of a king to encourage intellectual 
activity and research. Probably the world has never seen 
'a period in which the rulers of the civilized states, taken as 
a whole, were so unanimous in their efforts to advance know- 
ledge and culture. But Pyrrhos, king of a very backw^ard 
country, cared as little for knowledge or culture or an}' other 
immaterial thing as did any baron of the dark ages. He saidv 
openly (with a side-hit at Antigonos' philosophical tastes), ' 
that there was only one philosophy worthy of a king, and that 
was war ; '^ on war he wrote, and for war, as an end in itself, 
he lived. We may indeed suspect that one of the reasons 
which made him the darling of the common soldier was just 
this, that he, while born a king, was not altogether too far 
above the common soldier's level. 

' Pyrrhos' features may be preserved in a marble bust at Naples ; see 
J. Six, Ro»i. Mitt. 1 891, PI. VIII. He identified it as Pyrrhos, and A. J. 13. 
VVace {J.H. S. 1905, p. 94) thinks it fairly safe to accept this. The head is 
diademed, and wears a Macedonian helmet crowned with oak-leaves. The 
face is not attractive ; the set of the mouth, the large base to the nostrils, 
and the vertical wrinkles between the brows, give it an unpleasant, almost a 
peevish, look. It is quite unlike the traditional face of Alexander. 

« Plut. Pyrrh. 8. 

1476 S 


In one way he was a spoilt child of fortune ; no folly 
or mismanagement ever appeared to impair his prestige 
or weaken his attraction ; his legend even survived sheer 
defeat. He came back from Italy something worse than a 
failure — he came back without his honour, having by a trick" 
evaded the allies who had trusted him, and whom he left 
helpless before the vengeance of Rome ; yet he came back 
as formidable as ever. That he had been unable to make the 
least impression on the solid power of Rome is no matter for 
reproach ; where a Hannibal was to fail, a Pyrrhos was not 
likely to succeed ; but it is clear that he completely miscalcu- 
lated the nature of his undertaking. He had been confident, 
and rightly so, of his ability to beat the Romans in a pitched 
battle ; but he had never considered what was to happen if 
Rome refused to come to terms in spite of defeat ; and he 
was driven into an impasse by his inability either to conquer 
Rome or to make peace with her. 

Not a common soldier in his army v/ould have managed 
things as "BaHIy^as the brilliant Pyrrhos had done. To fight 
Rome alone was enough for any man; to drive Rome and 
Carthage into each other's arms and fight the two at once 
was madness. Most of all do the events in Sicily prove 
Pyrrhos' utter absence of statesmanship. It may have been 
too late to revive the policy of Dionj^sios I, and found an 
empire of all the Western Greeks ; it was not too late to 
form a strong buffer state in Sicily, a state that could have 
relied upon Epeirot support. The enthusiasm excited in 
Sicily by the advent of Pyrrhos was enormous ; tyrant after 
t3Tant laid down his power and handed over to Pyrrhos his 
troops; the whole island, save Messene and Lilybaeum, was 
in his hands. Carthage was so shaken that she offered 
Pyrrhos a war indemnity and a fleet if she might only keep 
Lilybaeum, which Pyrrhos might have known was in any 
case impregnable to an enemy who did not command the 
sea. Here surely was an opportunity of some sort for a 
statesman. But Pyrrhos, already unequal to the task of 
facing Rome, flung back the Carthaginian overtures, and 

^ Polyaen. 6, 6, i. — He may perhaps have had some idea of returning 
after conquering lylacedonia ; if so, he soon forgot about it. 


compelled the two great Powers to unite ; attacked, and was 
of course repulsed from, Lilybaeum ; alienated the Sicilians 
by all sorts of harshness, apart from the naval conscription 
(which they recognized as necessary- if he was going to fight 
Carthage), and then aroused a terrible outburst of hatred in 
the island by hanging his most prominent adherents on sus- 
picion and without trial ; lost Sicily as fast as he had won it ; 
fought a great battle against Carthage with his Syracusan- 
Epeirot fleet, manned with pressed rowers and troops who 
had never seen the sea, and naturally suffered a disastrous 
defeat,* which finally decided the secular duel of Carthage 
and Syracuse in favour of Carthage ; and then with shattered 
forces went out to be defeated again by Rome. The one 
result of his six years in the west, during which he had 
drained Epeiros of her best blood and weakened her per- 
manently, was to give to Roman legionary and Carthaginian 
sailor that confidence in themselves, each on his own element, 
with which they entered on their war for Sicily. Well may 
Antigonos have said of Pyrrhos that he was a gambler who 
threw^ good numbers but had no idea how to make use of 
them,^_ Pyrrhos was no second Alexander; he was, at best, 
a second-rate Demetrios. 

It was in the autumn of 275 that Pyrrhos suffered his 
defeat at the hands of Manius Curius. He was at the end of 
his resources ; his allies had lost heart, he had no money to 
enrol mercenaries, and he could not raise another man from 
Epeiros. He had alread}^ applied to Antigonos and Antiochos 
for help ; '' both had very naturally refused. Either that autumn 

* Pyrrhos got 140 ships at Syracuse, the remains of Agathokles' fleet (Diod. 
22, 8, 5), including the royal enneres. He left Syracuse with no ships, and 
lost 70 in the action, only 12 remaining seaworthy (Plut. Fyrr/i. 24 ; App. 
Samn. 12 ; Paus. I, 12, 5; ' Ined. Vat.' in Hermes, 27, 121, published by H. von 
Arnim). The Carthaginians even captured his own royal ship, an hepteres, 
and used it afterwards as a flagship of their own (Polyb. I, 23, 4). Niese 
(ii, 50) very rightly considered tiiat this battle did Pyrrhos more harm even 
than Beneventum ; and it evidently ruined the Syracusan sea-power. 1 do 
not understand how de Sanctis (Storia dei Roviani, 2,418) makes out that 
Pyrrhos saved Sicily from becoming definitely Carthaginian. The Itted. Vat. 
shows how enormously this defeat of Pyrrhos enhanced Carthaginian prestige 
at sea. 

'' Plut. Pyrrh. 26. We should use the metaphor from cards rather than 

« Paus. I, 13, I ; Just. 25, 3, i. 




or in the spring of 274 "^ he gave out for the benefit of his alHes 
and of the Romans that Antigonos was coming to his assis- 
tance ; and under cover of the impression made by the news 
he succeeded in shpping away unmolested by Rome. He 
brought home with him 8,000 foot and 500 horse, all that 
remained, sav^e the garrison left at Tarentum, of the large 
armies he had raised during these last years ; money to pa}' 
them with he had none. 

-But he had one great quality drawn from his very defects. 
A born fighter, he could never sit down under adversity ; and 
iFRe did spend his life in dropping the substance to grasp the 
shadow, he never lost hope that the very next shadow would 
turn substantially into the thing that he wanted. He now 
thought that Macedonia might prove an easier conquest than 
Rome or Carthage ; and at once set about enforcing his old 
pretensions to the crown. His grievance" against Antigonos 
is said to have been, partly, that Antigonos had refused him 
assistance in Italy, and partly * other things ' ; ^ speculation on 
the subject is useless, for the terms of the secret treaty of 285 
between Antigonos and Pyrrhos are unknown. A reason 
was not really necessary ; it was enough that Macedonia had 
once in part belonged to Pyrrhos. In the autumn of 274 
Pyrrhos started enlisting Gauls, and refreshed his wearied 

"^ The chronological data are as follows. Manius Curius triumphed in 
Feb. 274; therefore Beneventum was fought in the autumn of 275. The 
change of government at Athens cannot have taken place before Antigonos' 
defeat by Pyrrhos, and the pro-Macedonians were still in power in December- 
January of Hieron's year 274/3, ^- G- ii, 5, 323 b = Michel 1484 ; consequently 
the earliest possible date for Antigonos' defeat is spring 273. As a whole 
campaigning season must be allowed for Pyrrhos' Peloponnesian expedition, 
and as prior to this Antigonos was again defeated by Ptolemaios and then 
had to regain Macedonia, it is clear that Beloch was right in putting Pyrrhos' 
death in late autumn 272, and Ptolemaios' victory in 273. Now Pyrrhos 
sent messengers to Asia for help after his defeat at sea by Carthage, and 
they did not return till after Beneventum, Paus. I, 13, i; consequently his 
defeat at sea was at latest spring 275, and the messengers got back, at 
earliest, very late in the autumn of 275. He might then have crossed to 
Epeiros autumn 275, but spring or summer 274 is more likely. But Beloch's 
supposition, that he defeated Antigonos in 274 and crossed to Peloponnese 
in 272, not only runs counter to /. G. ii, 5, 323 b, but makes him spend 273 
doing nothing, which I cannot believe ; I therefore put Antigonos' defeat in 
spring 273, and Ptolemaios' victory the same autumn. The date of Bene- 
ventum being otherwise fixed, there will be no need to alter this even if 
Pomtow succeeds in dating Hieron in 276/5 (see Be7-l. Phil. IVoch. 19 10, 

® Paus. I, 13, 2. 


and unpaid troops b}^ attacking and looting the nearest 
Macedonian towns before going into winter quarters. 

It is necessary to turn now for a moment to events in the 
south. So long as Egypt held Phoenicia^ sa long had Antio-^ 
chos a standing grievance against her; and it appears that 
in the winter of 275 4 an arrangement was come to between 
Antiochos and Magas, the half-brother of Ptolemy II, who 
governed Cyrene for him, for a joint attack upon Egypt. 
Magas married Antiochos' daughter, Apame, probably in the 
winter of 275/4, and rose in the spring of 274,^ but Antiochos 
was not yet ready. It may, however, have been this danger 
which prompted Ptolemy to his marriage with his sister 
Arsinoe, which took place some time in 274, prior to Novem- 
ber of that year.^'' 

We last saw Arsinoe in Samothrake, where she had taken 
refuge after the murder of her younger sons by Keraunos. 
At what time she returned to Egypt is not known, except 
that she must have been there some little while before 274. 
She was not as young as she had been, and the result of her 
two experiments in marriage had hardly been of a nature to 
make her desire a third husband ; but her ambition, and 
probably her powers, had merely ripened with advancing 
years, and she seems to have had something of the confi- 

' Lehmann-Haupt, Klio, 3, 523. — Apame; O. G.I. 745. 

^^ The Pithom stele shows Arsinoe was queen by 2 Nov. 274, and Lehmann- 
Haupt (/. c, 524), following Koehler, put her marriage in the summer or 
autumn of that year. Beloch (3,2, 130) thought it might be much earlier, 
even 278. — Now the ttoixttt] described by Kallixenos was compounded of 
several festivals; those of Alexander and of Ptolemy I (Athen. 5, 201 d), 
those in honour of the deified parents of Ptolemy II (ib. 197 d and 203 a), 
and another in honour of Ptolemy II himself (ib. 203 b); and the balance 
was delicately adjusted between the last two, Ptolemy 1 and Berenike 
receiving twenty-three golden wreaths and Ptolemy II twenty-two. If 
Arsinoe had been queen (and co-ruler, see her head on the coins) she must 
surely have appeared with Ptolemy 1 1 ; and her absence seems to me proof 
that she was not married at the date of this nofirrrj. If, then, this tto/htti; be 
the second celebration, in the winter of 275/4, of the penteteris of which the 
first celebration {Sr//.- 202 = /. G. xii, 7, 506) was in 279/8 (H. von Prott, 
Rhtin. Mus. 53, p. 460) — and I share the common opinion that this is most 
probable— then Arsinoe was married between spring and November 274. 
But recently Bouche-Leclercq, after a long discussion, preferred 279/8 for 
Kalli.xenos' Tro^Trr; (vol. iv, 1907, p. 307), and Delamarre (notes to /. (/. xii, 7, 
506) seemed inclined to agree. If this be well founded, the marriage could, 
so far as the nofxnr] goes, be 278 ; but in any case I adhere to 274, as I cannot 
dissociate it from Slagas' revolt and Pyrrhos' return. — See .\ddenda. 


I dence afterwards felt by her kinswoman Cleopatra that kings 
\ and kingdoms existed to be her puppets. But she did 
( not aim as high as Cleopatra was to aim. Her desire was 
not the empire of the world, but the empire ot Macedonia f 
a quite feasible ambition. She had twice been queen of that 
xountr}^ ; she desired again to be queen, if not of Macedonia 
then of some other state, but in any case she desired the 
kingdom of Macedonia for her eldest and sole surviving son 
Ptolemaios.^^ Twice he had ruled some part of it ; '^ and 
he had a workable claim as the sole surviving legitimate 
descendant of Lysimachos. 

But the most powerful lever cannot be worked without 
a" standpoint. Looking about her for firm ground from 
which to start, Arsinoe can have found but one place, Egypt ; 
her first step, therefore, had to be to establish herself in her 
brother's kingdom. But though she sought the crown of 
Eg3'pt for herself, it was but as a step toward the crown of 
Macedonia, perhaps for herself, anyhow for her son. For her 
policy as queen of Egypt is known ; ^-^ it was a strenuous 
revival of the policy of her father; stir up trouble for the 
Antigonid in Greece by posing as the champion of Grecian 
liberty. Her point of view was undoubtedly hostile to Anti- 
gonos ; for her policy was the policy that produced the 
Chremonidean war. The crown, then, which she had in view 
was the crown of Macedonia rather than that of Egypt ; but 
first she must control the resources of Egypt. Of her ability 
to control them to good purpose she can have had no doubt ; 
and very properly so. 

Doubtless the idea of marriage with her easy-going brother 
came from her, and not from him. She was the master will 
of the combination ; perhaps also the master mind, though he 
was able enough. Her difficulty must have been the hostility 
of the Macedonian element in Egypt to such a marriage, 
a hostility that would weigh heavily with such a nature 
as her brother's. It was an extremely tolerant age ; but 

" See generally App. 7. This view of Lehmann-Haupt's is also adopted 
by Ferguson, Athens, 170, 175. 

*- Once (nominally) while Arsinoe held Kassandreia ; and again actually 
during the avafixm (Euseb. I, 235 (Schoene)). 

" 6y/.-2i4. 


there were one or two things to which even that generation 
objected, and the marriage of a full brother and sister was one 
of them. It may be that the revolt of Magas gave her 
the necessary lever, by showing the advantage to the State of 
her virile counsels ; but it may also be that the revolt was 
the result of her accession to power. Anyhow, Ptolemy 
repudiated his wifCj another Arsinoe, a daughter of Lysima- 
chos, who had borne him three children, and married his sister. 
The Greek-speaking element in Alexandria disapproved, 
and the poet Sotades expressed the popular feeling in 
a verse of unexampled coarseness, for which he afterwards 
paid with his life ; but we hear of no serious difficult}' ; and 
the queen's wonderful ability must soon have tended to 
reconcile the ruhng caste to the accomplished fact. To the 
native Egyptians such a marriage was of course right and 
proper for the king, consecrated by a tradition coeval with 
the Pyramids. 

Arsinoe had now the power she wanted for herself. She 
became, and was treated as, not merely queen in name, but 
co-ruler in fact, with her head on the coinage ; and pending 
the provision of the crown of Macedonia for her son, she 
seems to have persuaded Ptolemy to adopt him. She 
made life easy for her pleasure-loving husband, and tolerated 
his numerous love affairs, while she herself at once set to 
work to infuse some energy into the foreign policy of the 
Eg3'ptTan governihenE "~ ~"'' 

In the summer of 274 Magas had invaded Egj'pt ; Ptolemy's 
Gallic mercenaries had revolted ; Antiochos was makinsf 
extensive preparations for war. It must have been obvious 
to Arsinoe, that if Antigonos, who was on very good terms 
with his brolTiBr-in-law Antiochos, chose this moment to put 
forward his pretensions to the Cyclades, Eg3'pt would have 
more on hand than she could well manage. Antigonos at any 
rate must be held off; and Egypt adopted the simple and 
obvious course of subsidizing her old friend Pyrrhos," who 
was proclaiming his intention of attacking Antigonos. An 
alliance, too, either already existed or was now made between 
Egypt and another traditional friend, Sparta. This seemed 
-'* See App. 7. 





to safeguard matters as against Macedonia ; and with Magas 
recalled home by a native revolt, Arsinoe felt free at the 
beginning of 273 to turn the v^^hole force of the kingdom 
against Antiochos ; prompt successin A^ia fofrowed. 

The Egyptian gold completely altered Pyrrhos' position. 
By the spring of 273 he had collected a formidable army, 
and invaded Macedonia in force by way of the Aoos pass ; he 
had many partisans in the western districts, of which he had 
j J once been king. Antigonos reluctantly found himself com- 
/! pelled to break with the ver^- necessary policy which he had 
[ desired to carry through, and to call out the Macedonian 
. ', troops. He must have known that to do this was to court 
vjpossible disaster ; but to meet Pyrrhos with the Gauls alone 
\was to make disaster certain. Pyrrhos entered Macedonia, 
either out-generalled or defeated Antigonos, and compelled 
him to a retreat ; on the march he attacked him again ; the 
Gauls, who had the post of danger in the rear, stood by their 
salt and were cut down to a man ; the Macedonians went 
I over to Pyrrhos in a body, and Antigonos fled to Thessa- 
! lonike.^^ Some parts of upper Macedonia and of Thessaly 
' fell at once into the conqueror's hands, though Aigai resisted 
and had to be taken by assault.""' Lower Macedonia was 
saved for the time by Antigonos' system of garrisons of mer- 
cenaries, and of governors specially appointed by himself; 
here the king again began to collect an army. 

Pyrrhos had won the usual victory; and the plaudits of 
the Macedonian phalanx had hardly died away when he began 
to incur the usual unpopularity. On the capture of Aigai his 

'° Plut. Pyrrh. 26. The reference to the rear-guard shows that Antigonos 
was already in retreat. As he only had Macedonians and Gauls, he had 
either disbanded his Greek troops during the peace for financial reasons, or 
(more probably) was using them to garrison his coast towns and fortresses. 
— The battle was fought inpi ra a-reva, which can only mean the Aoos pass, 
near Antigoneia, where Philip V made his first stand against Flamininus 
(Beloch placed the battle in Thessaly) ; see Plut. 7'//. 3 ra (mud ; Livy 32, 
5, 9, ' quae ad Antigoneam fauces sunt (stena vocant Graeci) ' (therefore 
Polybios had ra arevd) ; Philip calls the place ' insessas fauces Epiri ', Livy 33, 
4, 2, and one day away was a place called Pyrrhos' camp, Livy 32, 13, 2. 
To-day Klisura (Hirschfeld, ' Aoos ' in /-■. JV.). — Pyrrhos landed near Akroke- 
raunia, Paus. i, 13, i, and so would raid the north-west of Macedonia; 
Antigonos, under this provocation, had come to seek Pyrrhos and defend 
the limit of his territory. 

^•^ Polyaen. 2, 29, 2. 


Gallic mercenaries broke open and plundered the old 
tombs of the kings, stealing the gold and scattering the 
bones ; ^' Pyrrhos neither hindered nor punished, and opinion 
in Macedonia condemned him severel}'. He himself made no 
attempt to consolidate his conquest ; he turned south into 
I'hessal}', and alter declicatfiTg'tfiF'^tli'elds of the conquered 
Gauls in the temple of Athene Itonia— an act which probably 
meant that he claimed the leadership of the Thessalian 
League and treated Antigonos as deposed — he went home, 
taking with him the Macedonian shields to dedicate to 
the Dodonaean Zeus,^^ and leaving his son Ptolemaios as 
governor in Macedonia. By the autumn Antigonos, having 
collected troops From his garrisons and presumably engaged 
more Gauls, attacked Ptolemaios, but was again so com- 
pletely defeated that he escaped tit "is said) with onl}'- seven^ 
companions.^'-' This time it must have looked as if all were 
over; and Pyrrhos called Antigonos a shameless person for 
continuing to wear the purple after losing the power which 
it symbolized. — -.^- 

But Antigonos knew better than his rival. He understood 
P3Trhos, and he understood the kind of conquest which 
he made. In this case it seems to have been more than 
usually superficial,-" a temporary phase due to the magic 
of P3Trhos' name, and his relationship to Alexander ; and 
probably it only extended at all to that part of the country 
which Pyrrhos had ruled before. Though he must have 

" Plut. Fyrr/i. 26 ; Diod. 22, 12. — These tombs have not been found ; and 
as the Gauls were said opiTreiv, to dig them up, it is probable that they were 
not vaulted chambers of the so-called ' Macedonian ' type, known to the 
Greeks as Knfidpat, in which the dead reposed, not in sarcophagi, but on open 
beds of stone. The earliest known examples do not appear to be earlier than 
the end of the fourth century (P. Perdrizet, B. C.N. 22, p. 335) ; but a very 
beautiful tomb, Greek work, of the beginning of that century, but not quite 
Kamara type, has recently been discovered (Th. Macridyj/^/Z-r^^. 191 1, p. 193). 
The word KafX'tpn, however, is said to be ' Carian ', and might therefore be old 
Macedonian, like 'sarisa'. See further on this word Wilamowitz, /<?//;/'. 
1905, p. 104; E. Petersen, Neite Jahrbiicher 15 (1905), p. 698; F. Solmsen, 
B. Ph. W. 1906, S53 : F. Reuss, Rhehi. Mus. 61, p. 409. 

" Plut. Pyrrh. 26 ; Paus. 1,13, 2-3; Diod. 22, 11. 

'" This second defeat is probably much exaggerated, if true at all. It rests 
only on Just. 25, 3, 8, and produced no effect. 

, Plutarch's words are t.VKui hi ruiv TrpnyiidToyv avra QtliaioTTjTa /cat <Ti'<TTa(Ttv 
ixovrav fioi'ifjLov. It is quite useless quoting Euseb. i, 243 (Schoene) ; no one 
can say if Pyrrhos or his son Alexander be meant. 


held one or more of the Macedonian mints, he made no 
arrangements for issuing his own money; he contented him- 
self with surcharging some of Antigonos' pieces with an 
Epeirot monogram.-' Even while Antigonos was in flight, 
Pyrrhos was longing to be off on a new adventure which 

ad presented itself The instigator of this fresh under^ 

king — the fourth withm^'seveh years— was Kleonymos of 


Kleon3'mos was the younger son of the late king Kleo- 
menes,~and a violent and t3Tannical character ; he had desired 
the kingship, but had been passed over in favour of his 
energetic and capable nephew Areus, the son of his elder 
brother Akrotatos,-- Kleonymos left the city, seeking an 
opportunity of vengeance ; and Pyrrhos, with his known 
love of adventure, offered a likely instrument. To him 
Kleonymos went, received a command in his army, and 
was instrumental in taking Aigai for him ; after this he 
prevailed upon P3Trhos to reinstate him in Sparta. Ptole- 
maios must have been recalled from Macedonia some time in 
the autumn or winter of 273/2, leaving Macedonia to look 
after itself ; and in the spring of 272 ^" P}Trhos and two of 
his sons, Ptolemaios and Helenos, marched a very large 
force — it is said to have been 25,000 foot, 2,000 horse, and 24 
elephants, and included Macedonian troops — through Aetolia 
to the sea and shipped them, obviously with Aetolian aid, 
across to Achaea.^'* AetoHa had made her choice between 
Pyrrhos and Antigonos, and her choice was Pyrrhos. 

Antigonos must have remained in arms all the winter of 
273/2. The inevitable reaction against P3Trhos seems to 
have set in after the violation of the tombs at Aigai ; 
Ptolemaios ma3' even have left Macedonia because he needs 

^' Svoronos, _/(?//;'«. lutein. 191 1, p. 126 ; A. J. Reinach, ib., pp. 201, 202, 
The surcharge is ATTEIPnTAN in monogram. 

^- Paus. 3, 6, 2. ^^ See note 7. 

^^ The statue erected to Pyrrhos at Kallion {Syll? 919, see Beloch 3, i, 595, 
n. l) might date from after Pyrrhos' Itahan expedition, from the name 
[KaXXt7roX]ir«v, see ch. 6, n. 54. In any case, the first Aetolian gold staters 
were, like those of Pyrrhos, designed, engraved, and struck at Syracuse ; 
Head^ 334 ; some Aetolian pieces bear the Epeirot monogram, A. J. Reinach, 
Jottrn. Intern. 191 1 , p. 236 ; and this, together with Pyrrhos' passage through 
Aetolia, is good evidence. 




must. Antigonos had never lost the coast cities, strongly 
garrisoned and governed and supported by his fleet ; he ^ ^j~^ 
must during the winter and spring have recovered the j ^/'" 
.country, or most of it, almost as fast as he had lost it.^-' 

But his sudden overthrow had produced its natural result 
in Greece. The pro-Macedonian government in Athens fell 
in the autumn of 273 or the following winter,^" and was 
replaced by another. It is impossible to make out if the 
new government consisted of a coalition of Moderates or of 
the less advanced wing of the Egypto-nationalist party ; but it 
is clear that the pro-Macedonians were no longer in office. It 
Ts'not likely that the change took place without at least the 
friendly observation — perhaps co-operation is too strong a 
word — of Eg3'pt: there seems to have been an under-^"' 
standing — entente is the term used — between Egypt and 
Athens at the time, and it may perhaps have been now ■ 
that the Athenians erected statues of Ptolemy and Arsinoe ) 
before the Odeion. Egypt was feeling her way, so far as she 
could do so. 3ut so long as her hands were tied and her 
energies absorbed b}- the war with Antiochos, she was not 
ready for any breach with Antigonos. The relations of 
Egypt and Macedonia in 273 were still, officiall}^ good rela- 
tions, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say no 
relations at all; Antigonos could hardly know as yet that^ 
Arsinoe, apparently absorbed in the war in Asia, was 
already at work against him behind the scenes. ^Xi^Athjens 
the new government took a moderate line. An embassy was 
sent to P3-rrhos on his landing in Peloponnese, probably to 
ask him to respect the neutrality of Egypt's friend ; and com- 
munications were opened up with Aetolia. In or about the 
year 272 Athens is found, for the first time since the Aetolians 
gained control of Delphi, in possession of one of the two 
Ionic votes : a fact that shows that she was acting indepen- 
dently of Antigonos.. As Antigonos, while he controlled 
Athens, allowed no hieromnemon to go from her to Delphi, 

^' He had recovered all or most of it by the time Pyrrhos attacked Sparta, 
Pans. I, 13, 7 ; Plutarch implies the same. 

'® Not later, because of the embassy to Pyrrhos in the spring of 272 (Just 
25, 4, 4), and the relations with Aetolia that same year. 



the sending by Athens of an hieromnemon was practically 
equivalent to the repudiation of Antigonos' suzerainty'] at 
the same time, being an act essentially religious rather than 
political, it was not necessarily of a nature to provoke war. 
The same attitude of caution — willing to wound and 3'et 
afraid to strike — comes out strongly in the decree passed a 
year later on Laches' motion in honour of Demochares, with 
its eloquent omissions.-" 

Elsewhere in Greece movements were more pronounced. 
It was probably at this time that those of the Achaean towns 
wliTcIi had not yet declared themselves independent of 
Xntigonos did so,-^ completing what had been begun in 
280 ; the ten towns now formed a small federation, with a 
promising constitution rather like the Aetolian, but otherwise 
of no special importance. It may have been now, too, that 
Sik3'on got rid of her tyrant Kleon and established for a 
little while a democracy, under the lead of two prominent 
citizens, Kleinias and Timokleidas ; but there is nothing to 
show that Kleon had been a partisan of Antigonos.^^ More 
important to Antigonos was the loss of Euboea, including 

" Beloch's dating of the Uelphic archons Archiadas, Eudokos, and Straton, 
now seems a fixed point ; see ch. 7, n. 147. Pomtow has recently accepted 
his date (273/2) for Archiadas ; B.Ph. W. 1912,606. It follows that tliere 
was a change of government at Athens circ. 273, or she could not have sent 
a representative to the Amphiktyonic council. With this agree two other 
items of evidence ; Laches' decree for Demochares of 271/70, which could 
never have been passed under a pro-Macedonian government (see ch. 10, 
p. 289 ; Antigonos might have smiled at it, but not the pro-Macedonian 
Athenians) ; and a fragment of Alexis' Hypobolimaios (Kock ii, p. 386, 
no. 244), which refers to an eniettte (o/ioj/oia) with Ptolemy II, and belongs 
about this time, as it falls while Arsinoe was queen. Ferguson {Athens, 
pp. 169-73) does not recognize any change of government at this time, and 
attempts to explain away Laches' decree, not, I think, with success. He 
does not notice Athens' Amphiktyonic vote. I do not make out whether 
Lehmann-Haupt [Klio, 5, 381) thinks there was a change of government or 
not. — The statues; Paus. i, 8, 6. — The date of the appearance of the 
Sarapiastai in the Piraeus {I.G. ii, 617; Paus. i, 18, 4) is quite uncertain ; 
Beloch 3, I, 449 ; Ferguson, Athens, 171. 

"^^ Polyb. 2, 41, 13-15. The movement may not have been completed till 
the Chremonidean war. 

-'•' Plut. Arat. 2. It is quite uncertain, for it is not known how long this 
republic lasted, though Plutarch implies for some little time. Decree of 
Delos for Timokleidas, Diirrbach in B. CH. 1904, p. 135, no. 31. A Timo- 
kleidas is also mentioned on a broken base from Delphi, possibly a dedication 
of statues of Alexander son of Polyperchon and Kratesipolis (Pomtow, 
B. Ph. W. 1909, 286) ; but as Alexander was murdered in 315 the dates are 
a difficulty, and it might be this Timokleidas' grandfather. 




Eretria an d Chalkis, a grievous blow to the commuokatioas 
between Demetrias and Corinth/'" The vital importance of 
Corinth to Antigonos was never better demonstrated than 
now; so long as he held Corinth, everything could be re- 
established. But the use of Corinth depended on the sea, and a 
it was just asjwell for himjn272 that EgxRlJiad^he r hands fu^j J] 


In the spring of 272 Pyrrhos landed in the Peloponnese. 
Events were moving much too quickly for the Egyptian 
governmentV"and before the war with Antiochos should be 
e ntled"^ Lliey ' Weie ~r6'pass'Fnt!re1y out of Egyptian control 
But as yet Arsinoe believed that Pyrrhos was still working in 
tFe interests of Egypt ; and his first proceedings were calcu- 
lated~to reassure her. He gave out on landing that he had 
come to free the Peloponnesian cities that were still in 
Antigonos' hands. These were few and unimportant,"^- save 
Corinth ; but it sounded well, and Pyrrhos was not there to 
attack Corinth. Of the independent states, Achaea and 
Messene sent envoys ; -^^ Elis and perhaps others joined him ; 
when he reached Megalopolis, the ' Great City' opened her 
gates to him. Up to that time Sparta seems to have had no 
misgivings. Pyrrhos was the friend of Egypt, and Sparta 
her ally, in fact if not in name ; and King Areus, with the best 

^" Euboea exercises one of the Ionian votes in the Amphiktyonic council 
in 272 and 271, being represented by an Eretrian and a man of Chalkis 
respectively; Beloch 3, 2,328,350. For Eretria see also Diog. L. 2, 142 
and 127. 

^' Antiochos entered the war in the spring of 273. Its events seem to 
demand more than one campaign, which again is required to explain why 
Egypt played no part at all in the events in Greece in 272. All that the 
dates require is that the war should be over a sufficient time before Arsinoe's 
death, July 270, to allow of Theokritos writing his ' Praise of Ptolemy ' in the 

^'^ There can have been nothing outside Achaea, except perhaps one or 
two towns in the Argolid. 

2^ Just. 25, 4, 4. This does not prove that Achaea and Messene joined 
him (Beloch supposes that Achaea did, 3, i, 595), any more than Athens did. 
Messene is said to have aided Sparta afterwards against Pyrrhos' attack, 
Paus. 4, 29, 6 ; the two actions are not necessarily inconsistent. But the 
statue of Pyrrhos erected by the Elean Thrasyboulos in the Altis at Olympia 
(Paus. 6, 14, 9) does seem to prove that the Eleans joined him ; for Thrasy- 
boulos appears later as one of the murderers of Aristotimos, whom Antigonos 
supported (Plut. A/or. 253 h), and therefore as a member of the democratic 
party which had the support of Aetolia, at present Pyrrhos' friend. See 
Niese 2, 56, n. 5. 


of the Spartan levies, was in Crete, where one of the never- 
ending wars between the Cretan cities was in progress, 
fighting there in the interests of Egypt, who either now or 
soon after acquired a firm footing in the island by the 
possession of Itanos."* At Megalopolis Spartan envoi's met 
Pyrrhos, who protested that nothing was further from his 
thoughts than an attack on Sparta ; but the envoys must 
have doubted, for a messenger seems to have been sent off in 
haste to recall Areus, if indeed this had not already been 
done. After some stay at Megalopolis Pyrrhos moved 
leisurely forward, plundering the Lakonian territory as he 
marched through it, and came in sight of the wealthy •'''' and 
ill-defended city. Not wishing, it is said, to enter Sparta by 
night, he camped and waited for the morning. He had 
thrown to the winds his word given to the Spartan envo3's ; 
he cared nothing that Sparta was the friend of his friends ; he 
meant to take thecit^^, just because it had never been taken. ■^'^ 
V Sparta'did many fine things in her time, but few finer than 
that night. The Senate first decided to send the women 
away to Crete ; but a noble woman named Archidamia, 
mother of a noble race,"^ came down to the council chamber 
with a drawn sword in her hand, and demanded of the elders, 
in the name of her sex, if theythou-ght that Spartan women 
would care to live after the city was taken. Meanwhile the 
men had started on the entrenchments, digging a broad ditch 
opposite to Pyrrhos' camp and lagering wagons at either end 
of it, bedded up to their axles in the earth. But they had 
hardly begun when the women and girls turned out in a body 
and took the work from the hands of the men who had to 
fight next day, telling them to sleep while they with the old 
men finished it. At dawn they handed over the completed 

" O. G. I. 45. See also the inscription of Itanos in honour of Ptolemy III 
and Berenike (published by A. J. Reinach, R.E.G. 191 1, p. 392) which 
describes Ptolemy III as irapaXa^un' rhv tu)U 'iravlwv ttoXiv kuI noXiTas napa 
Tw TTciTpos ^aaiKecos TlroXe fiaio) kol tu>v npoyovcov. 

^^ G. Kazarow, A7to, 7, 47, on the gold which Sparta collected. 

'"' What follows, to the end of the chapter, unless otherwise noted, is merely 
a brief paraphrase of Plutarch's Pyrrhos, ch. 27-34. This splendidly pic- 
turesque narrative carries the reader away ; whether we can believe it all is 
another matter. The story and its sources are considered in App. 8. 

37 j^gj- grandson was the reformer Agis. 


fortification to the fighters, with the old Spartan bidding, 
either to conquer or to diej^vorthy of Sparta. 

For two days the unequal battle raged along the trench and 
the lagered wagons. On the first day Ptolemaios, at the 
head of a picked body of Chaonians and 2,000 Gauls, nearl}' 
broke through the wagons, but was repulsed by Areus' son 
Akrotatos, who left his post on the other side of the city, 
hurried to the point of danger with 300 men, and took 
Ptolemaios in rear, almost driving him into the trench ; then, 
streaming with blood, he marched back in triumph through 
the city, while the old men followed him cheering. But the 
second day was even more critical, for the defenders were 
wearying, and many were wounded or dead. All through the 
hours of fighting the women stood by the men, handing up 
missiles, supplying them with food and drink, and carrying 
away the wounded. The Macedonian troops in Pyrrhos' 
service had in the night cut great piles of wood, and these 
they now hurled into the trench, together with shields and 
corpses and anything that might serve to fill it. While they 
thus engaged the attention of the defenders, Pyrrhos in 
person turned the end of the line of wagons and led an attack 
at the head of his guards. Almost he was through ; already 
shrieks for the captured city rose from the women ; then 
a Cretan javelin pierced his horse, which plunged, fell, and 
fiung its rider ; the Spartans charged, and swept his Compan- 
ions back in disorder. But the defenders had lost heavily, 
and the survivors were worn out ; one more assault would 
have carried the day. ,But before it could be delivered, 
Antigonos' general Ameinias, mafching in all haste from 
Corinth, had flung himself into the city with his men ; soon 
after came Areus the king with 2,000 Cretans and merce- 
naries ; and Sparta was saved. Thereupon the women went 
quietly to their homes; it no longer became them to be 

„^tigonos, with plain common sen^^^■, had gone direc_t__tp 

the central point of the position. jHeJiad-^eeft that noth ing 

jTOw mattered compared to the man Py rrhos ; Pyrrhos must 

be followed at any cost. Ther efore he, too, Having' I'eL'uvered 

Macedonia before Pyrrhos reached Lakonia, had left it, loyal 


or disloyal, to shift for itself, and was shipping- all his avail- 
^ table troops to Corinth. Sparta, it is true, was his consistent ^m 

jopponent ; but at present his only tnougnt was Pyiili^S; '^M 
M^xiPyrrhos' enemy was for the moment his friend. He had 
fl^''^ therefore sent forward in all haste his best general, Ameinias, 
the ex-pirate ; ^'^ and he had been just in time ,_ For t he 
second time in his history, P3Trhos had accomplished the 
feat of driving two great rivals into each other's arms. 

Pyrrhos was loath to leave the city; lie made one more 
attack, and was beaten off. He then withdrew his troops, and 
thought of taking up winter quarters in Lakonia ; but a 
message from his partisans in Argos caused him to alter his 

<mind, and to snatch at a new hope ; whether victorious or 
defeated, he must needs trouble the world till he died. Two 
parties in Argos were at feud, the stronger one, led by 
Aristippos, being favourable to Antigonos ; and Aristeas, who 
led the other, sought to be beforehand with his rival by 
callingjn Pyrrhos. Pyrrhos broke camp and set out north- 
ward. In a pass in the hills he was ambushed by Areus and 
the Spartans and his rear-guard cut up ; he sent Ptolemaios 
to their assistance, and Ptolemaios was slain by a Cretan, 
a famous runner named Oryssos. Pyrrhos and the main 
body struggled on through the pass ; the Spartans pursued 
with little caution ; once out of the hills Pyrrhos turned on 
them, and at the head of the Molossian horse took ample 
vengeance for his dead son. But he had lost valuable time ; 
and he arrived at Argos to find that Antigonos, hurrying 
from Corinth, had already crowned the heights above the 
town with all his forces, and held an impregnable position. 
Pyrrhos camped in the plain near Nauplia, and (it is 
said) sent a herald to Antigonos, calling him a robber 
and challenging him to come down and fight it out ; 
Antigonos, with all the cards in his hand at last, naturally 
I replied that he would fight as and when he chose;. Mean- 

^^ Wilamowitz, Antigonos, p. 213, n. 35, calls Ameinias commander in 
Corinth ; and it is possible that he commanded the garrison under Krateros. 
But Krateros could not have risked denuding Corinth, of all places, of troops ; 
and I think Ameinias, with his fighting record, was more probably in com- 
mand of Antigonos' advance-guard. Plut. Pyrrh. 29 only says tw 'Ai/Tiyoj/ou 




while Argos, caught between the hammer and the anvil, sent 
envoys to both kings, begging them to retire and leave the 
city free, on terms that it should be the friend of both. 
Antigonos agreed, and proposed to send his son as a. hostage."^ 

"^yrrhos, too, agreed, but offered no hostage. 

That night P3Trhos' partisans in Argos opened the gates, 
and the king, well accustomed b}- now to break his word, 
poured troops into the city from both sides. All went well 
until he attempted to bring in the elephants ; the gateway 
was too low to admit the towers which they carried, and the 
noise made in removing and then replacing them roused the 
sleeping city. The Argives flew to arms, and dispatched 
a messenger to Antigonos for help; he came down to the 
plain and sent forward his son Halkyoneus with a strong 
force, and he and Areus, who with his mixed arm}' of Spartans 
and Cretans had. followed Pyrrhos up, attacked the Gauls 
from behind as they were entering. P3Trhos himself, from 

"TEhe other side, reached the market-place ; there he was 
caught in the inextricable confusion of a soldier's battle in the 
narrow streets ; he could neither advance nor retreat. Day- 
light revealed the whole city choked with men, fighting each 
other just as it chanced, in utter disorder; a message which 
Pyrrhos managed to send to his son Helenos outside, bidding 
him break down the wall and free him a way out, only made 
matters worse, for the message was wrongl}' given, and 
Helenos attempted to enter the city with all the troops left. 
An elephant became jammed across one of the gates ; another 
elephant, seeking its wounded mahout, ran amuck through 
the turmoil ; and in the press and the confusion, H^'rrhos, 
trying to cut a way out himself, was struck on the back of 
the iTecTc and stunned by a tile thrown from a house-top by 
an old woman who saw her son in danger. Before he could 
properly recover his senses, one Zopyros, a mercenary in 
Antigonos' service, had recognized him, and with an Ill^-rian 
sword clumsily hacked off his head. Halkyoneus came up 
on the news, galloped off with the head, and flung it at his 
father's feet as he sat in his tent with his Council. When 
Antigonos recognized it, he struck Halk3'oneus with his staff, 

^' 'K8t8ov. The context shows that Halkyoneus was not actually sen'tT" 


,_„ calling him accursed and barbarian, and then covered his 
face with his cloak and wept, for he remembered the fate of 
nis grandfather Antigonos and his father Demetrios, and he 
knew not what Fortune might yet have in store for his house. 
Pyrrhos' army was leaderless and aimless. Helenos sur- 
rendered to Halkyoneus, who received him gently and led 
him to Antigonos, this time gaining his father's approbation, 
tempered by a rebuke for having allowed Helenos to retain 
the garb of a suppliant. The king treated Helenos with 
every kindness, and sent him back to Epeiros ; he himself 
received the surrender of all Pyrrhos' army. The long duel 
of the statesman and the soldier w'as over; and it was 
Antigonos who gave his rival the due funeral rites. On the 
spot where Pyrrhos fell, the Argives raised a temple to the 
goddess Demeter, who, so their legend said, had slain him 
in the form of a woman ; there the ashes of the war-worn 
Epeirot found their rest.^^ 

" Paus. I, 13, 8 ; 2, 21, 4. This is what Pausanias was told in Argos, 
and I see no reason to doubt it. There was, however, a monument at Am- 
brakia called Pyrrheion (Poiyb. 21, 27, 2 = 22, 10, 2; Livy 38, 5, 2); and 
Justin (25, 5, 2) says that Antigonos gave Helenos ' sepulti patris ossa in 
patriam referenda' (cf. Val. Max. 5, 1,4). But if Helenos was to take home 
the remains they would not have been buried at all ; and this whole story of 
burial and re-exhumed bones is suspect, for Hieronymos says that Antigonos 
butnt the body (Plut. Pyrrh. 34, see App. 8). The stor^^ might well have 
been invented because of the Pyrrheion ; at the same time it may be doubt- 
ful whether the ashes were not at some time removed to Ambrakia. — There 
was a story that Pyrrhos' great toe, the touch of which would cure splenetics, 
refused to burn, like Shelley's heart, and was sent to Dodona in a gold 
casket ; Val. Max., Nepot. Epit., 9, 24. 



The death of Pyrrhos left the Peloponnese in a very dis-^ 
turbed state. Nearly every city was divided against itself; 
if one party had declared for Pyrrhos, the other had 
naturally stood by Antlgonos. This can be seen most clearly 
in the case of Argos and Elis ; but it must also be true of 
many other towns, notably of Megalopolis, to which Pyrrhos 
had been admitted by his partisans. According to the tradi- 
tion, those towns which had not actually joined Antigonos 
were in a state of civil war ; and there is no need to disbelieve 
this. The state of parties in nearly every city was a reflection 
of that which obtained at Athens ; that is to say, the old 
labels of oligarch and democrat had been replaced by two 
new parties, the friends oflVIacedonia and the friends ot 
"Egypt, '"'and 'the latter had welcomed Pyrrhos. Now Pyrrhos 
was dead and Egypt had no help to give them ; and the 
triumphant partisans of Macedonia were not likely to deal 
any too gently with their rivals. Greek faction-fights were 
not as a rule waged in kid gloves.^ 

There was no question as to who was master of the situa- 
tion. Antigonos was on tiie spot, without a rival, and with a 
victorious army. Egypt had not helped her friends in the 
hour of trial — indeed it would have been difficult for Egypt 
to know what to do, with Pyrrhos and Sparta fighting each 
other — and Egypt had no claim to any voice in a settlement, 
save as the ally of Sparta. And Sparta, though her deep-seated 
hostility to Macedonia was not of course diminished one whit 
by the fortuitous occurrence of their recent co-operation, 
could_not for the mo ment do otherwise than assent to suc h 
measures as Antigonos in reason might take ; she could not 

^ Just. 26, I, 1-3. If his words, ' Peloponnensii per proditio)iei)i Antigono 
traditi,' have any meaning, they must refer to Egypt. — The state of parties 
at Argos, Plut. Pynli. 30 seq. ; in EHs, ch. 9, n. 33, and p. 2Zt post. 

T 2 


in decency quarrel at once with the man who had just rescued 
her from Pyrrhos. 

It has been well said that, putting Aetolia aside, the one 

■weighty question of politics in the Greece of this epoch was the 

question, xvhere the influence of Egypt en Jed and that ofMace- 

donia began.- This question, on Pyrrhos' death, had suddenly 

become clear-cut. Antigonos had hitherto had to reckon with 

the ever-present threat of Pyrrhos ; now that Pyrrhos was 

dead and Epeiros no longer dangerous, he could s^e \yhat 

had lain behind, the far more dangerous threat of Egypt. 

Eg3'pt had einerged stronger than before from her war with 

-^ Antiochos, though for the moment she had suffered a severe 

I check through the defection of Pyrrhos from her interest, 

'\k^efecci6n"nE!iaI 'iTad left Antigonos arbiter of the Pelo- 

ponnese. Sparta indeed was bound to Egypt's interest 

hand and foot, if only by her hostility to Macedonia, and 

Eg3'pt could strike at Antigonos through Sparta as and when 

she would ; but at present this was out of the question. 

I Sparta could not at once make war on her preserver ; Egypt 

Ajcould not touch Antigonos' victorious land-army directly ; the 

J \ sea-power could do nothing for the moment, in face of the 

A. I'Dverthrow of her friends in the different cities, but watch, 

■^wait, and work. The difference, however, between the two 

great Powers had now definitely come out into the open ; 

Eg3'pt claimed the crown of Macedonia, Macedonia was soon 

to be brusquely reminded that she had once had, and lost, the 

rule of the sea. Everything that was to happen in Greece, 

Aetolia apart, for the next twenty-six 3'ears was to be affected 

by this rivalry. 

Antigonos was now face to face with the question of his 
policy towards Greece. In the circumstances he could prob- 
ably have recovered parts of it without any great difficulty ; 
for in many of the towns he possessed a strong, even a domi- 
nant, party devoted to his interests, as the event was to show. 
Large parts of it had once belonged, first to his father Deme- 
trios, and then to himself; would he attempt to recover them ? 
How would he deal with those who had helped Pyrrhos? 
Would he take and garrison what he could an d rule h} 

^ Wilamowitz, S/aai und Gesellschaft, p. 16S. 



strong hand, as he had done before he became king of Mace- 
donia, or would he revive Demetrios' discredited policy of a 
"union of heart sT~ '""' ' "' '" ^" 

Antigonos' first aim was a prosaic one ; he wished to be ^ 
free to return to Macedonia, w here ewrything that he had 
already done was waiting to be done over again. The unstable 
base of his power there made any schemes of new conquest 
absolutely impossible, even had he desired such. He did 
not desire to be king of Greece; he. was first and foremost 
king of Macedonia. Had he desired acquisitions in Greece, 
Tie*ToiTI^TTave made them now ; and the fact that he held his 
hand shows that he held it deliberate!}'. His problem was 
a different one ; how to keep Greece neutralized, keep it from 
actual interference with his own kingdom and pohc}-, without 
imposing a strain on the finances and forces of Macedonia 
which Macedonia at present could not bear. 

The first thing was to consider what was the minimum 
that was vital to Macedonia. Antigonos' conception of his 
sphere has already been noticed.' Peloponnese, except 
Corinth, was outside the sphere : but the war had shown 
once more that the importance of Corinth could not be over- 
estimated. Crnncqucntlj' Corinth nnd its ■r. nmmnnirntiongy^ 
northward must be safeguarded in exciy way : apart from 
this, the Peloponnesian question resolved, itself merely into 
keeping a sufficient check on Sparta, and through Sparta 
upon Egypt. The natural checks on Sparta to the north- ' 
ward were Argos and Megalopolis. Both these large cities 
were divided; each contained a strong Macedonian party, 
but each had opened her gates to Pyrrhos. To take^jicL 
garrison them w as not at all what A ntigonos desired ; he was 
not yet strong enough to spare too many garrisons, even if he 
had wished to. .It is probable, too, that he had long since 
mastered the fact that a city garrisoned against its will was 
^no source of strength to him, though it might be a source of 
weakness to the eneni}'. An alternative was to establish his 
own party in office in each town ; but such a government 
might be overthrown, and would almost certainly be over- 
thrown at any moment of crisis just when he wanted it. 
^ See ch. 7, pp. 198, 202. 


What applied to these two cities applied also to the smaller 
ones that had once been under Macedonian rule. 

Antigonos' solution as regards the Peloponnese was, not 
merel}' to establish his own part}' in power in such of the 
cities as were necessary to him, but to aid the leading man of 
that party to rule the city as a 't^Tant', that is to sa}', an 
unconstitutional ruler, who maintained his power by means 
of mercenaries, acted in Antigonos' interest, and was assured 
of Antigonos' support. Such a scheme would in effect enable 
Antigonos to garrison the cities without having to bear the 
cost, and would ensure stability and continuity. The tyrant 
would have the support of the pro-Macedonian faction ; he 
jlcould hold in check the patriotic or democratic opposition, 
.vhich would naturally look to Egypt for help, and the very 
"act of this opposition would keep him, from motives of self- 
reservaition, faithful to Antigonos' interest. It may be that 
Antigonos had in his mind Alexander's S3^stem of governing 
the lands outside his sphere— that is to say, to the east of the 
Indus — by means of protected native rulers; but there was 
a good deal of difference between hereditar}^ kings of Indian 
races, like Taxiles and Poros, and tyrants in Greek cities. 

That Antigonos supported a certain number of tyrants, and 
found them useful allies, is undoubted. That he himself 
actually installed them, or was responsible for their seizure 
,'jof power, .is-~-not always clear. We must bear steadily in 
mind that it is just at this point of Antigonos' histor}^ that we 
I lose the guidance of Hieron3'mos, who, even at third hand, 
i'has kept tradition in a sound path; and that hencefort h we 
•depend on sources of information avowedly hostile, often 
^bitterly hostile, to the Macedonian king."^ The one con- 
'*temporary document, the decree moved by Chremonides,"' a 
document whose business it is to represent Antigonos in the 
worst possible light, says in general terms that he wronged 
and broke treaty with the cities and tried to subvert their 
laws and their ancestral constitutions ; but it does not men- 
tion the establishment of tyrants. A reference to ' ancestral 
constitutions ', however, very often imports something to do 
with a tyranny,*^ but the phrase need not mean more than a 
* See App. I. ^ Sj'//.'^ 214. " See App. 5, pp. 437, 438. 



general support of tyrants. In Pol3'bios' dramatized view of 
Antigonid policy, the Aetolian Chlaineas, who plays the 
devil's advocate, is allowed to lay great stress on Antigonos' 
policy of * planting ' t^Tants, but is also allowed to exagger- 
ate in grotesque fashion/ Polybios' own verdict is given 
elsewhere, more soberly, but almost in the Aetolian's words ; 
it is, however, qualified by ' it is said that ' ; Polybios was 
clearly not satisfied with the evidence on the matter.* Lastl}^, 
Trogus is plain and emphatic, but cannot carry things further 
than Polybios does.^ 

The actual number of tyrants known is not great, and only 
one can be dated with certainty to the years following the 
death of Pyrrhos, though it is clearly implied that it was at 
this time that Antigonos oTigiriate'd" the system. Aristotimos 
of Ells was leader of the party in Elis which was opposed to 
the friends of Pyrrhos, and, though he looked to Krateros 
for aid when once in power, accounts differ as to whether he 
was installed by Antigonos or whether he himself seized the 
tyranny in the ordinary way.^° The tyrant Abantidas in 
Sikyon did not establish himself there till about 264, eight 
years after Pyrrhos' death, and there is no evidence whatever 
that he was a partisan of Antigonos. In any case the fact that 
Antigonos acquiesced in the continued independence of the 
little Sikyonian democracy, which had been established in 
274 or thereabouts, is eloquent of the fact that he sou ght no 
conquests in the Peloponnese, andwas not festablish mg tyrants 
for amusement ; Sikyon was noT dangerous to him and was 
not engaged in civil war, and he left the town alone.^^ One or 
two tyrants of smaller cities, mentioned at a later time, may 

'' Polyb. 9, 28 seq. Chlaineas' words (9, 29, 6) are 01 6e rvpai/vovs f/i0i- 
revovres oiiSffj-iav noXiv tifioipof eTroirjaav tov rfjs dovXelas ovofxaTos. 

* Polyb. 2, 41, lOj nXeicTTovi yap Sq fioi/dpxovi oiros (Gonatas) €fjL(f>vT(i(Tai 
SoKfl Tols "EWT]<n. I do not find that epLCJivrfveiv occurs in this sense except in 
these two passages ; one would l.ike to know their relationship. Is Polybios 
quoting some popular phrase, perhaps manufactured in Aetolia ? 

'•' Trog. /'?o/. 26, 'quibus in urbibus Graeciae dominationem Antigonus 
Gonatas constituerit.' 

'" Contrast Paus. 5, 5, I with Just. 26, I, 4. Plut. Afor. 250 F and 253 A 
merely show that Antigonos supported him, which is certain from the state 
of parties. 

" Abantidas : Plut. Am/. 2 and 3 ; Paus. 2, 8, 2, a curious jumble. On 
the dates, which depend on Aratos' age in 245, and generally, see ch. 12, 
p. 361. 


conceivably be the successors of tyrants set up b}^ Antigonos, 
but this is quite uncertain.^'- The two towns that really 
matter are Megalopolis and Argos. How and \vhe n_Aristo- 
dcmub of Megalopolis and Aristomachos of Argos came by 
their poweT is unknown ; there are difficulties alike in the 
way of supposing that they did, or that the}'' did not, establish 
themselves in the 3'ears immediately following Pyrrhos' 
death. ^-^ Certainly Aristodemos, if not already in power by 
the time of the battle of Corinth, was ruling at Megalopolis 
shortl}^ after that event.^"* Aristotimos of Elis turned out to 
be abominably cruel, and was assassinated after five months 
of powder ; even so, it is clear that his misdeeds have lost 
nothing in the telling.'^ But Aristomachos and Aristodemos 
were capable rulers. The latter was called ' the Good ' ^"^ ; 
while Aristomachos founded a secure dynasty, which had a 
history almost unique among the houses of tyrants ; for after 
the Argives had twice refused to aid the Achaean League to 
expel his elder son Aristippos, when success would have 
been certain, his 3^ounger son, another Aristomachos, who 
succeeded his brother, voluntarily laid down his power and 
became elected general of the League instead. In what light 
the dynasty was regarded at Argos can be deduced from the 
interesting fact that inscriptions relating to it have survived ; 

^"^ Those of Hermione and Phlious in 229 and of Orchomenos in 235 ; see 
Beloch 3, 2, 310. There is no evidence that a tyrant Aristokleides or Aristo- 
melides at Orchomenos, whom Xiese (2, 226) makes one of Gonatas' men, 
belongs to this time at all. 

^^ If they did not, then Trogus can hardly be right in attributing the insti- 
tution of Antigonos' system to this time, as these are the two important men. 
If they did, how came Areus in 265 and 264 to be able to move about the 
Peloponnese unhindered, when Aristodemos alone was strong enough to 
intercept, defeat, and kill Areus' son? — Beloch (3, I, 600, n. 1) argues that 
Aristomachos may have been son of the Aristippos of Plut. jyrr/i. 30, and 
that this Aristippos became tyrant on Pyrrhos' death. It is possible, but 
evidence is wanting. 

'^ On the date of Aristodemos' accession to power see note 84. 

^^ Justin and Plutarch go back here to the same source, almost certainly 
Phylarchos. It is instructive therefore to see how that which in Plutarch is 
a scheme oi plunder, cruelly enough carried out, and ending in the imprison- 
ment of the women {Mor. 251 C-Ej, becomes in Justin ' occisis prius in gremio 
matrum parvulis liberis virginibusque ad stuprum dereptis '. It is a good 
object-lesson in the worthlessness both of Justin's moral embellishments and 
of these sort of stories. — It is very doubtful if the silver coins of Elis with 
API, formerly attributed to Aristotimos, are his ; Head ^ 424. 

1'^ 'O ;(pr;o-TOf, Paus. 8, 27, II. 



it was indeed a rare event for a t3'rant's monuments to outlast 
his rule.^^ -— = 

It is evident then that later writers indulged in a good deal 
of general exaggeration, and are not to be too credulously 
followed ; such things, for instance, are found as the com- 
mander ^'^ of a Macedonian garrison, or even the stalwart 
champion of a democracy,^^ being spoken of as 't3Tants'- 
The only cities in which, as far as, is known, Anti^'onos sup- 

^ ported his system were those which were absolutely necessary^ 
to him, if he w^as to safeguard the position of Macedonia as 
a great power; Argos and Megalopolis as checks on Sparta, 

' Elis, w^hich had aided Pyrrhos, as some check on a disaffected 
Aetolia. Further than this he made no attempt to go. He 
himself was certainly not actuated by any tyrannical feelings. 

*|He acquiesced in the revolt and federation of the little towns 
of Achaea, as he had already acquiesced in the revolt and 
ind"ependence of Boeotia ; Messene and Sik3'on he left alone as 
strictl}^ as he left the communities of Northern Greece. Mere 
conquest in Greece was not a thing which he ever contemplated 
or desired ; this is written plain on every page of his history. 
At the same time, though greatly exaggerated, the accusa- 
tion that he installed tyrants may, the accusation that he 
supported t3Tants does, correspond to a fact. That fact 
excited much feeling throughout Greece;-'' and it will be as 
well to consider for a moment what it means. There are a 
good many ways of looking at it. First, there is the Mace- 
donian view, w^hich was probably that of Antigonos. From 
this standpoint, the sole question was the benefit of Mace- 
donia. For the good of the Greek cities, Antigonos was (he 

" Plut. Ant/. 25, 27, 35. Though Aratos, after his wont, calls Aristippos 
an even more pernicious tyrant than his father, he has not been able to hide 
away the crucial fact that the Ar^nves twice refused to fight against him. 
Surely no one will ever again, witli Freeman, treat Aratos as evidence on 
such matters ; having failed to assassinate both father and son with the 
dagger, he tried again with the pen. — See the inscription relating to Aris- 
tippos and the younger Aristomachos; Wilhelm, Beitrage, p. no, no. 95, with 
his commentary. 

"* Pythennos ap. Athen. 2, 44 c ; cf. Beloch 3, 2, 383. 

''•' Timokleidas at Sikyon (Plut. Arat. 2) is called a tyrant by Pausanias, 
2' 8» 2. 

^ It is the one single fact about Antigonos that our anti-Macedonian 
tradition has invariably managed to remember. See e.g. Euseb. 1, 237 
(Schoene) : oJror (unv o ti]V 'EXXiiSti fyKpnTUi xtipooad/xtvoi. 


might have said) not responsible ; they were not his ; if they 
all cared to combine, they could drive him out of Greece at 
any moment ; if they did not, it was their affair. Moreover, 
they had objected to his garrisons, and to his tribute ; they 
were now free from both garrisons and tribute. 

Secondly, there is the Greek view. It was no gain to 
exchange a responsible garrison-commander and a fixed 
tribute for an irresponsible and perhaps cruel tyrant, who 
could plunder as he wished : it was an unjustifiable and 
wicked interference with the rights and liberties of a free city- 
state and its members. To this we shall return. 

Lastl}'-, there is our own view, the point of view of modern 
morality. Let it be assumed that private morality docs apply 
in the sphere of government : and let it further be assumed 
that we ma}^ if we please, apply our own moral standards to 
the men of 2,000 years ago— a large assumption. Then the 
truth is, that Antigonos was doing at (say) Argos on a large 
scale exactly what every citizen of Argos did all his life on 
a small scale, and that both were very reprehensible people. 
A democratic Argive would have put it, that the king had 
enslaved the Argives; but the democratic Argive himself 
owned slaves, and was a member of a community and a 
civilization whose brilliance was entirely based on, and due to, 
slave labour. That, so far as is known, he generally treated 
his slaves well is beside the point; so far as is known, Aris- 
tomachos the tyrant treated Argos well. The point is, that 
the moment we introduce our own moral standard, the whole 
of Greek ' freedom ' becomes a myth. There was no such 
thing as a free Greek city ; liberty was the prerogative of 
certain people only ; a large part of the population of the 
peninsula were slaves. If it is to be granted to Polybios' 
Chlaineas that Antigonos was bound to take thought for 
independent Greek cities, that he was in fact his brother's 
keeper, then the same unfulfilled obligation would clearly lie 
on every slave-owning democrat in Greece. 

This being so, it may look at first sight as if, both parties 
being tarred with the same brush, there was nothing to do 
but to consider the question of expediency ; that is to say, that 
the Macedonian view is the right one, and that the only ques- 


tion is, Did the policy pay from the point of view of Antigonos' 
kingdom of Macedonia ? But this will hardry~do.~rrwas,Tt'is 
true, quite illogicaTthat a slave-owner should object to a t3Tant. 
It was, it is true, quite abominable that a free democracy should, 
as often happened, sell the population of another free city for 
slaves, or that a people rejoicing at its delivery from the 
cruelty of a tyrant should, as happened, proceed to treat the 
tyrant's harmless women-folk with equal cruelty. The stern 
Hebrew law-giver, who declared that the sins of the fathers 
should be visited on the children, at least assigned the visita- 
tion to his God ; tbe_Greek democrat often enough took it 
into his own hand. 

But for all this, we are bound to take into consideration the 
Greek view. We are bound, it would seem, to take Greek 
* freedom ' as we find it, according to the standard of the time, 
and not appl}' to the men of the time a standard which they 
had no means of knowing or reaching. AndJ:lie- mca of tho ' 
time did not yet see clearly that domestic slaver}' and political 
slavery, which they called tyrann}', were alike parts of one 

evil. Hence the pm-ndnv, ^{iRt whilp nn Gi-.-fk- pvpr rajc^pd 

his voice against slavery in the abstract,-' hardly any Greek 
"ever doubted that it was a meritorious act to assassinate a 
tyrant. But in spite of this, the feeling of the ordinarj'- Greek 
citizen toward tyrants in the third century was no doubt 
being gradually strengthened by the fact that, though no one 
protested against slavery, there was a better feeling growing 
up with regard to the treatment of the slave ; his loss of free- 
dom, it was said, should render him a subject for compassion 
rather than blows : and the number of manumissions was 
steadily growing.^^ All this must, it seems, have reacted on 

^' From time to time some one refused to sell Greek citizens for slaves, 
like Kallikratidas ; but this was not a protest against slavery in itself. Aris- 
totle {Pol. I, 3) records that there were some in his time who argued that 
slavery was against nature, and, being based on force, was unjust ; but 
probably this was an academic argument rather than a practical view of life. 
See the question discussed in Newman's Politics, i, 139 seq. The Stoics 
never took up the question of abolition, as one would have expected them to 
do, owing to a peculiarity of view ; they considered that the slave was already 
free (if he chose to be) i?i his oii'n wind, and what happened to the body 
was a matter of indifference. (See R. D. Hicks, Stoic and Epicurean, 1910, 
p. 144.) 

^'^ Epicurus (Diog. L. 10, 118 = fr. 594, Usener) had said nvhk KoXaanv 


the sentiment of the ordinaiy citizen toward a tyrant, a man 
who, he would sa^', had enslaved himself and his friends. 
There is no need to multiply well-known instances of that 
sentiment ; but it may be useful to quote some almost con- 
temporary cases in Greek law. At Eresos an old statute 
provided that a t3Tant if taken was to be tried on the capital 
charge, and his descendants banished for ever; it is known 
that under this law two t3Tants at least were condemned to 
death, and that both Alexander and Antigonos I on appeal 
allowed the city to enforce its law against the banished 
descendants of former tyrants who desired to return.^" Again, 
at Ilion, a law passed about the beginning of the third century 
provided beforehand what honours were to be paid to any one 
who should thereafter assassinate any tyrant of the city.-^ In 
the case of a tyrant, killing was indeed no murder. W^^hat- 
ever then his attitude tow^ard others' freedom, the ordinary 
Greek citizen had got to the length of a passionate desire for 
his own. The feeling was far indeed from the modern one ; 
it sometimes embraced only the circle of the subject's fellow- 
citizens ; at best, it extended only to the citizens of other 
Greek cities, men of equal standing with himself. But every- 
thing must have a beginning ; and, such as it was, this was 
> i one of the beginnings of the idea of liberty, and, as such, is to 
be recognized as one of the highest expressions of the moral 
standard of the times, even though it worked, as it often did 
work, by the most unworthy means. / 

Consequentl}^ Antigonos' policy /deliberately fell short of 
the highest standard of the time. Doubtless he knew this 
perfectly' ; ver}- likely he held a view which, whether it 
be right or whether it be wrong, has ahvays commanded 

Tov^ oiKfTui, eXti]creiv fievToi : and the aphorism ' Be pitiful to slaves ' was 
becoming a commonplace early in the century (Inscription from Kyzikos, 
J. H. S. 27, 62 (3) = 6, 53 in F. W. Hasluck's Cyzicus ; a collection of ' copy- 
book ' maxims). The Stoic theory of the brotherhood of man was helping 
to bring about a change of attitude toward the treatment of slaves ; and Zeno 
when ill refused to be treated better than his slave ; Arnim 287. The New 
Comedy has an honourable record in this respect. — For the manumissions 
see A. Calderini, La iiiatiomissione e la condizione dei liberti in Grecia, 
1908, ch. 5. 

'^ O.G.I. 8; I.J.G. 2, p. 161 seq. ; E. L. Hicks and G. F. Hill, Greek 
Historical Inscriptio7is, 157 [125], p 294. 

'■'* O.G.I. 218 ; I.J. G. 2, p. 24. Time of Seleukos I. —See Addenda. 


a JargO-ibllo-wing, the view that the business of a states- 
man is not morahty, but the good of his countiy. It is 
tair to suppose that h^ saw no practical alternative, and, 
in adopting the policy of expediency, was content to take 
the usual risks of such a polic3^ Sentiment had been 
tried by Demetrios, and failed ; to garrison the cities he 
was not strong enough ; a third course, to retire altogether 
from the Peloponnese, would have been absolutely incon- 
sistent with his duty to Macedonia as he understood it ; i 
it would only have given Egypt a free hand, and produced | 
a worse war than the Chremonidean. He therefore allowed 
the end to justify the means; that is to say, he did evil; 
that good might come of it. What came of it the sequel 
will show. 

Emphasis has been laid here upon the fact that Antigonos' 
polic}^ was one of expediency only, because a different view 
has found large acceptance. According to this view, Anti- 
gonos was prompted to set up a system of tyrants by his "" 
Stoic sympathies and training ; he thought he was setting up 
in this or that city the rule of the One Wise Man.-^ This ~ 
view seems to be peculiarly wide of the truth ; a Stoic would 
never for an instant have confused the rule of king and 
tyrant, the legitimate monarch of willing, and the uncon- 
stitutional monarch of unwilling, subjects. Plato and Aris- 
totle indeed, though outwardly emphasizing the distinction 
between king and tyrant, had gone near to saying that the true 
monarch, when he came, would (save for his willing subjects) 
be merely a glorious tyrant; he would transcend all laws, which 
would merely be hindrances and shackles upon him.^*^ But 
since then the world had seen Aristotle's dream of the ' god 
among men ' realized in the universal divine kingship of 
Alexander; and the Stoics^iiowever much their speculations 
owed to Alexander's career, were no longer inclined to put 
the true monarch above all law ; he was rather to be the 
interpreter of law, not indeed of this or that code, but of the 

" Wilamowitz, AnHgonos, p. 217; Ferguson, Athens, 163, 176; Kaerst, 
Antigonos, no. 4 in P. W. I (ii), col. 2417 (in part only; in part due to political 

=« Plato, Polit. 293 seq. ; Aristot. Pol. 3, 1284^, cf. A. C. Bradley, Hcllenicr, 
p. 238. 




divine law immanent in the universe and binding on all men 
alike. And when the Stoic brought his speculations down to 
earth, nowhere do we find the distinction between the true 
king and the tyrant drawn more sharply, or with more just 
understanding of realities, than in one of the surviving frag- 
ments of Stoic literature.-'^ ThroughoutJii§t9r3', Stoics fought_ 
against the ' tyrant ' whenever they found one. And even in 
the case of that other third-century monarch whom they 
trained, Kleomenes III of Sparta, though he brought about 
a revolution and was called a tyrant by his enemies, a Stoic 
if questioned would undoubtedly have said that, on the con- 
trary, he had overthrown a tyranny, a condition of things in 
conflict with the ' common law ' ; and can it be said that 
he would be wrong ? 

The next question for Antigonos' consideration was the 
communications of Corinth. Apparently this was not taken 
in hand till 270, a proof that Antigonos' fii'st care had to be 
Macedonia, where he must have spent the year 271. But in 
270 he recovered Euboea,^^ and again placed it under Kra- 
teros. It was perhaps at this time that he occupied Megara, 
though this is uncertain. ^^ He had now all of Greece that he 
wanted ; a chain of territory, or rather of fortresses, binding 
[Corinth to Demetrias. 

The brief independence of Eretria was marred by a sad 
incident. Menedemos was suspected (we hardly need to be 
told, falsely) of a desire to betray the city to his friend 
the king, and was sent into banishment. He went first 
to Oropos, and in the temple of Amphiaraos awaited events ; 

^■^ Suidas, /3acrtXeta 3. See ch. 8, n. 120. 

^* Athens and Euboea do not vanish from the Amphiktyonic Hsts till 270 ; 
Beloch 3, 2, 250. The decree of Laches for Demochares shows that at some 
time in 271/70 the pro-Macedonians had not yet returned to power. 

^'-^ Polyaen. 4, 6, 3. Antigonos had elephants with him. This fact excludes 
the years before 277, when Antigonos had no elephants ; any Demetrios had 
were lost in 288 to Lysimachos and Pyrrhos. Antigonos in 277 recovered 
those of Lysimachos, which had passed to Keraunos, less any which Keraunos 
may have lent to Pyrrhos ; but he lost all his elephants to Pyrrhos (Plut. 
Pyrrh. 26), and did not recover them till Pyrrhos' death ; therefore the war 
with Pyrrhos is also excluded. It must then fall here, where I have placed 
it, or in the Chremonidean war. The fact that Megara does not appear 
among Sparta's allies in Syll? 214 is by no means conclusive against the 
latter date ; Megara may have joined later, or been trying to preserve 


there he was seen b}' Hierokles, Antigonos' general in 
Piraeus, who thought to please the exile b}' an account of 
how Antigonos had taken the town. Menedemos' savage 
rebuke to him showed that the old man's heart was still 
with the city that he had done so much to render illus- 
trious ; and it is said that he now returned secretly, took his 
wife and daughters, and went to Antigonos to plead for his 
country's freedom. Antigonos himself would have given it, 
even w ith the knowledge that it must probably mean another 
war ; Pefsalos^diss'iiaded him. Menedemos died soon after 
at Antigonos' court ; it is said that he fell into deep dejec- 
tion, and no longer cared to live.^° 

In Northern Greece the onl}' question that need ed atte n- 
tion was AetolTa. Antigonos had sought no compensation,! 
territorial or otherwise, from Epeiros for Pyrrhos' attack on 
him; he had sent home Helenos and his Epeirots, and left 
the countr}' intact -^^ to Pyrrhos' son and successor Alexander ; 
presumabl}^ he made peace with him on the basis of each'' 
country keeping what it had prior to 274. This generous 
treatment meant that he desired a friendly Epeiros as neigh- 
bour. Alexander had a war on his hands forthwith with 
the Illyrian king Mitylus, who doubtless aimed at recovering 
the territory taken from Illyria by P3Trhos ; but Mitylus was 
presently defeated,"'- and Alexander succeeded in keeping 
together his much shaken kingdom. 

Aetolia, however, had definitely favoured Pyrrhos, and she 
had also given shelter to the Eleans exiled by Aristotimos, 
whose rule was marked by great cruelty. With Aetolian 
help the exiles returned, and fortified a post in the country ; 
a conspirac}' was formed against Aristotimos ; he was struck 
down b}' one Kylon, after a rule of five months ; Krateros 
came up from Corinth too late to aid him. The Aetolians 
erected a statue at Ol^'mpia to Kylon, and the Delphians 

^^ Diog. L. 2, 127, 142, 143. IloXXa XtyonTos ufpi rffs dXtotrfo)? rr/i 'EfHTpim 
can hardly, I think, mean ' tried to secure the co-operation of Menedemus in 
an attempt on Kretria ', as Ferguson puts it, Athens, 165. 

'^ Epeiros still marched on the north with Illyria, as is shown by Alexan- 
der's war with Mitylus ; Trog. Pro/. 25. 

^- App. Illyr. 7 is very vague, but seems to show that Alexander held as 
much of Illyria as Pyrrhos had done. 



afterwards passed a decree in his honour. But the populace 
of Elis gave a signal illustration of how a democracy can vie 
even with the worst of tyrants ; as a great favour, and at the 
request of a woman, they allowed the tyrant's two young 
daughters to hang themselves, in lieu of worse. The pathetic 
narrative of the girls' death is told by the same writer who 
relates the cruelties of their father ; both stories must stand or 
fall together.-"'* 

Antigonos saw that, if he would have peace in the north, as 
he desired, he must come to an arrangement with Aetolia, 
the one Power strong enough to stand in complete indepen- 
dence even of Egypt. The subject is excessively obscure, in 
the absence of any inscriptions that might throw light on the 
details ; but it can be stated with confidence, from subsequent 
events, tliatj\ntigonos th ought that peace was worth some 
concessions, and that an ancan^pni'?"'" ^^i/t ^ come to . The 
main lines of it can be tenta tive ly gathered. Wha t was past 
was to be past. Pyrrhos was dead and Antigonos alive, a"nd 
Jthere was room enough in the North for both "A elolia and 
Macedonia without either troubling the other. Antigonos 
sought nothing from the states of Northern Greece, which 
he regarded as outside his sphere ; and probably he gave 
Aetolia a free hand, so far as he was concerned, to bring 
^m into herTIeague at her pleasure, while he treated 
Aetolia^s control ~bf the Amphiktyonic body as a religious 
father than a political matter, and not one for interference." 
Aetolia in fact obtained from Macedonia the recognition"sHe 
\ wanted ; henceforward (leaving Epeiros aside) there are /z£'o 
:eading and rival powers north of the Isthmus of Corinth, 
'n return, Aetolia promised neutrality. It sounds little, but 
it sufficed. Antigonos formally abandoned that which he had 
never had any intention of trying to possess, in return for an 
undertaking by Aetolia never to act against him; let her do 
what she wished to emphasize her neutrality before the world, 
but she must not join with Macedonia's enemies, that is to 

'* Plut. Mot: 250 F, MtVxa Kn\ MeyioTo) (almost Certainly from Phylar- 
chos). — Statue at Olympia to Kylon, Paus. 6, 14, 11; decree of the Del- 
phians for KvXXwr KvKKavos 'HXejoy, Syll.^ 920. He killed Aristotimos, Paus. 

5, 5, I- 



say, with Sparta or Egypt. A nd so long as Antigonos lived, 
Aetolia's undertaking was observed/'^ 

It will be seen~ffom this brief review that ^-Autigonos ' 
jnteresisJlLGreeceJAthens apart) now fell into t wo g roups ; 
first, those states of the Peloponnese that were friendly to 
him ; and secondly, a group of fortresses with .territory 
stretching northward from Corinth towards Demetrias, the 
most important being Corinth, Piraeus, Chalkis. These for - 
tresses held Athens in their arms, so to speak, as a glance 
aT a map shows ; and the connecting k not of bo ih groups 
was Corinth. Outside these two groups, Greece was free 
and was n ot interfered with^ Mainland communication 
between Cormth and Demetrias there was none ; Boeotia, 
Lokris, part of Aetolia all intervened ; the only route was by 
sea, or through Euboea. Right along the sea route, from 
Cape Sounion to the mouth of the Gulf of Pagasai, on which 
stood Demetrias, stretched the long island of Euboea, 
protecting and landlocking it. The interdependence of the 
whole system is clearly shown on the map ; how Corinth 
knots up both groups, how Chalkis commands the route to 
Corinth, and how the two together dominate Athens, now 
that she has lost Piraeus. 

^ Sll'^j'"^'- '•t^^'- ig iinfnrt unately VP 'T ^h'^^''^'^ i*^ Antin-onnn-' 
dealings with Athens after the w ar. T he nationalist govern- 
ment was still in power in 271 ; Athens still kept her place 
in the Amphiktyonic council, and in the year 271/70 the 
Athenians, on the motion of Demochares' son Laches, passed 
a decree in honour of Demochares, who had recently died.'*'"' 
Though the decree was carefully worded, so as not to allude 
either to Demetrios or to Antigonos, or even to Macedonia, its 
ii pport js__Qb-VlQ.u.s : h on o u rs for the good democratj_\yliQ .had 
disdained to serve uikIlt an}- <ilii;arrlii<-' li.c [m-o Macedonian) 
government, who had borne exile lor his t)i)niiuns, and who 
had obtained money from all Demetrios' enemies, Lysimac hos. 

Ptolemy, J-4^si machos' son-in-law Antipatros. e yfry h'^ri'-^r 

" This arrangement can only be deduced from subsequent events, which 
it is required to explain. The fiction that the Amphiktyons were indepen- 
dent of Aetolia was consistently maintained ; Polyb. 4, 25, S. 

'* Plut. X Orat. Vit. 851 D scq. ; Pytharatos' year. 

UT5 U 



Eno wingLAi'ell .what tha t money had been used for : all th i s 
hows that the part}^ in power, while anxious to preserve 
peutralit}' and avoid hostility to Antigonos, was not pro- 
Macedonian. But in 270 Athens vanishes from the Amphik- 
tyonic lists ; and as this is the year in which Antigonos was 
campaigning in the neighbourhood and recovering Euboea, 
w^e must suppose that it was in this year that the government 
was overthrown on^e more, the pro-Mac edonians, returned 
to power, and Antigonos' vague suzerainty was again. cei:5gr. 
nized. Doubtless the change came about peaceabl}^ ; the over- 
Thrown government had merely sought neutrality and had 
not acted against Antigonos ; with the restoration of the pro- 
Macedonians to power Athens merely returned to the position 
of the favoured city which she had held from 277 to 274.^° 

One event of the first importance marks the year 270 ; in _ 
July died Arsinoe.'^' She had enjoyed her power for four 
-years only; but the impress which she gave to Egyptian 
policy lasted long after her death. Had she lived, no doubt 
the Chremonidean war would have been fought sooner, and 
fought with more energy by Egypt, even as the first w^ar with 
S3Tia had been fought ; but the events of 272 had for the 
time tied the hands of Sparta, and of Egypt through Sparta ; 
and before it was again possible to force, pypnt-g Arginnp wa-c; 
dead. She was deified as the goddess Philadelphos, she who 
loves her brother ; b}- a strange chance the name, which that 
brother never bore either in life or after death, became 
attached to him, and he is universally^ known as Ptolemy 
Philadelphos. He carried out one of Arsinoe's wishes 
shortl}' after her death ; she had been more than titular 

^^ See ch. 9, n. 27. A pro-Macedonian government must have been in 
power again at Athens from about 270 to 266, for (apart from the fact that 
after 270 Athens vanishes for a time from the Amphiktyonic lists) Antigonos' 
relations with Athens seem to have been again the same as in 277-274 ; it was 
at this period that Demetrios the Fair, who cannot have been born before 286 
(perhaps in 285), must have been studying in Athens under Arkesilaos 
(Diog. L. 4, 41) ; before 274 he was too young. 

" Beloch 3, 2, 130; Lehmann-Haupt, Klio, 5, 384. Bouche-Leclercq, 
vol. iv, p. 310, refers to a papyrus {Hiheh Pap., no. 99) dated 20 Daisies 
(about June) in the fifteenth year of Ptolemy II = 270, with the formula e(/)' 
Uptcos 'Wf^dvdpav kui Qemv 'ASeX^wf. But this need not show that she was 
dead by June ; it may only show that she had become a goddess before her 
death. I need not go into the controversy on this point. 


queen, she had been co-ruler, and Ptoleni}^ replaced her, 
so far as possible, by promoting her son b}'^ Lysimachos, 
Ptolemaios, whom he had adopted, to be co-ruler of the 
empire with himself in her place.^*^ 

One of the things on which Arsinoe had left the distinct 
mark of her strenuous personality was Egypt't^ rule of th e 
sea. Philokles and his contemporary nesiarch, Bacchon ot 
Boeotia, were apparently dead ; and both Philokles' suc- 
cessor, Kallikrates, son of Boiskos, and Bacchon's successor, 
Hermias, displayed much devotion to the queen. It is 
possible that their appointments were due to her, more 
especially as Kallikrates came from Samos and Hermias 
(probably) from Halikarnassos, both formerly possessions 
of Lysimachos ; but, as regards Kallikrates anyhow, this 
is far from certain. It is certain, however, that if he had 
once been an adherent of the other Arsinoe, the first wife 
of Ptolemy II, he had known how to transfer his worship to 
the rising sun. He dedicated statues of Ptolemy II and 
Arsinoe at Olympia ; and he built for her w^orship, as 
Aphrodite Zephyritis, a temple at Zephyrion, which he only 
completed after her death.^^ Arsinoe herself took an interest 
in Delos ; there was erected on the island, either by her or in 
her hono'y", a building called the Philadelpheion, which con- 
tained her picture ; ^^ and it was no doubt at her request 
that Kallimachos wrote his Hymn to Delos, to be sung at the 
federal Ptolemaieia, with its allusion to the events of 274 and 
its curious attempt to show that Ptolemy had borne his part 
in the contest against the Gauls no less bravely than Anti- 
gonos or any one else.^^ The meaning of the stones, of 

»8 See App. 7, pp. 444, 446. 
■ ^' Hermias, _/./?". 6'. 191 1, 251 ; Kallikrates, ib. 254 seq. ; where all the 
references are collected. 

*" B. C.H. 191 1, p. 75, no. 47, 1. 38, TO ^i\a8(\(j)eiop, and see Diirrbach's 
notes, especially the reference to the oIkos ov 17 ypa(pfi 17 'Apaivoi^i ; Arc/iiz'es, 
Ixxvii A, 1. 164 (Sosistratos). 

*^ See line 171 and the scholion ; the drowning by Ptolemy of his Gallic 
mercenaries who revolted in 274 is Ptolemy's share of the ^vnuv "ledXos of 
himself and Apollo against the Gauls ! It was written as soon after 279 as 
it can be placed, i.e. soon after 274, and no doubt, like Theokritos' 'Praise 
of Ptolemy ', before 270. The suggestion that it was written for the Ptole- 
maieia of Delos was made by A. J. Reinach, /^ev. Et. Ant'. 191 1, p. 46. For 
other suggestions, Susemihl i, 360. 

U 2 


which so many have been found in the Islands, bearing 
simpl}' the words ' Of Arsinoe Philadelphos', is not l<nown ;^^ 
neither is it known if Arsinoe had an}^ part in what was to be 
the one lasting monument of Egypt's sea-power, the book of 
the chief steersman Timosthenes of Rhodes 'On Harbours', 
which filled, for the sailors of the third centur}', the place 
taken to-da}^ b}' the Mediterranean Pilot and the charts 
issued by the British Admiralty.^^ But it is sigoj^ant that 
one of the best harbours in the Aegean, which the Egyptian 
fleet was to use as its base in the Chremonidean wax^-wfts 
re-christened b}' her name,^^ as was the na\'al post which 
Egypt was to seize later in the Argolid.*' What she would 
have'done had she lived can onl}' be guessed ; but what the 
men who served her thought, we know. After her death the 
nesiarch Hermias made a vase foundation on Delos, of the 
usual type, which came to be known as the Philadelpheia. 
But the vases did not bear the customary inscription. Along 
with the usual dedication to the gods of Delos, Apollo, Artemis, 
and Leto, appears a dedication to two other deities, Ptolemy 
the king and Arsinoe Philadelphos ; and while Ptolem3''s 
name comes last in the inscription, Arsinoe's comes first of all, 
taking precedence even of Apollo himself'*'^ / 

He re, w^ith the 3'ear 270, th e curtain falls/^not ty rise ag^in 

*''■ For conjectures see notes to O. G. J. 34. 

^^ Susemihl i, 660; Wilamowitz, Griech. Lit. 89. Of course if he was 
vaiapx'^^ and not af)xi-Kvl3epi>rjTr]s he must come late in Ptolemy IPs reign. 

" It is uncertain if Arsinoe in Keos (/. G. xii, 5, 2, 1061, cf. Sy//.' 261, 1. 78) 
was Poiessa (VVilamowitz, ad loc.) or Koressos (Graindor, B. C. H. 1906, 

P- 97). 

*^ Arsinoe-Methana, /. G. xii, 3, 466 ; cf. O.G.I. 115 ; Syll? 261, n. 11 ; 
Beloch 3, 2, 283. On the inscriptions, the identification, though probable, is 
not proved ; but J. N. Svoronos in Joiir7i. Intern. 7, p. 397, gives a coin of 
INIethana which, in his opinion, renders the identity certain. 

^^ On the identity of the Philadelpheia and the festival founded by Her- 
mias see E. Schulhof, B.C.H. 1908, p. 114; it is absolutely certain, as 
shown by ISIenethales {I.G. xi, 320) B, 1. 25, which gives both Hermias' name 
and the title Philadelpheia. The first vase appears under Meilichides ii, 267; 
Menethales,l. 28 ; Boulon (/. G. xi, 313), 1. 64; Akridion (I.G.xi, 298), A, 1. 80; 
it was therefore probably not founded till 268. Akridion, 1. 80, gives the 
fniypa(})7] on the vases : [A]>;XaiSes ^npeln [eViSJoj/ros 'Ep^i'[ov ' Apcnv6r]i $iXn- 
Se'Xj^ot 'A[7r6XXcoi'i 'Aprtfxidi A/jrot k(H ^^o■lXet nTo]X[f]junici)i, the gap after 
'Epfxi being fully given in Menethales B, 1. 25. — Other dedications made 
jointly to an old and a new deity are known, e.g. a stoa at Halikarnassos 
dedicated to Apollo and King Ptolemy, O. G. I. 46 : and a dedication ^apdnidi 
"laidi [;i{]acrtX€i <I>iX(7r7rcoi, P. Perdrizet in B. C.H. i8 (1894), p. 417, no. I. 



till the year 266. The events of the three intervening yearsl \ 
aje in our tradition ahiiost a blank. Antigonos was hard at] 
work consolidating his power in Macedonia, and trying to 
get the countr}^ on to a sound footing, work that was this 
ti me tn eii d-in siicct .--s ; he also came periodically to Athens, 
where his half-brother, Dcnietrios the Fan^, son of Demetrios 
the Be siegei- and Ptolemais, was studying philosophy under 
Arkesi laos/" just as his son Halkyoneus was doing at Pella 
under Persaios. Ptolemy in the meantime was quietly prepar- 
ing to carr}' out Arsinoe's polic}'. He had nowa formal alliance 
with Sparta ; ^"^ and Sparta was re-forming the old Pelopon- 
nesian League ; she had alread}'' by 266 found a number of 
allies, Elis, the Achaean League, Tegea, Mantineia, Orcho- 
menos, Phigaleia and Kaph3^ai — that is to say, practically the 
whole of Arkadia except Megalopolis — and some of the 
Cretan cities.*^ Megalopolis and the Argolid held to Anti- 
gonos; Messene was aljlc, as so often, to maintain com- 
plete neutrality, and possibly Sikyon also ; but the League 
embraced the larger part of the Peloponnese, and, so far as 
the Peloponnese alone was concerned, a great superiority in 
force. Discon tent with Anti garLOsL^system. and the natural 
Greek hatred of a tyrant, probably had a good deal tu do 
with bringing Sparta recruits. 

That the inihative in rhf en su ing war came from Egypt is 
f airly plainj v..shQWJi-in..-ChrejiiQXii,d es' decree.^'^ But though 
Fjyypf_hxid for Innp^ he^n H esirous of attacking Antigonos, she ^-H 
favoured the plan of attackmg- him hy depn i-y ; t;hp prnpnc^pf^ 
t hat others should do the actual fighting. She had secured 
as much of the Peloponnese lor her purpose as she could 
hope to do ; she now attempted to induce some of the other 
states of Greece to join. It is possible that she had some 
success ; Histiaia in Euboea, for instance, is found about 

" See note 36, and Diog. L. 7, 6. 

*" Note the number of J'tolemaic coins in a third-century hoard found in 
Lakonia ; A. J. 15. Wacc, />'. S. A. 14 (1907-8), p. 149. 

^' Sy//? 214. 

*" See Lehmann-Haupt, K'lio, 5, 384. It seems to follow from tlic war 
being fought in pursuance of the policy of Arsinoe ; Syll? 214. The com- 
posite motives that led to the war are well given in Ferguson, At/u/ts, 
pp. 175-7- 


266/5 exercising an Amphikt3'onic vote, which can best be 
explained by a revolution from Antigonos ;^^ and it does not 
follow that no other cities joined in the war beyond those 
which Chremonides in 266 enumerated as already in the 
Spartan League. But the great triumph was the winning over 
r^j of Athens. At smrre L im e p i iu i t o 266" a Ptolemaic embassy 
visited the city. All that is known about it is that some one 
collected a number of philosophers to meet the envoys at 
dinner, and that Zeno, who was among them, refused to talk : 
and when the envoys asked him what they were to say about 
him to their king, he bade them tell him that there was one 
man in Athens who knew how to hold his tongue.°- It 
needs no guessing to see what Egyptian envoys were there 
for, or what sort of talk passed round at that dmner. Zeno 
adhered inflexibly to his rule of political neutrality ; but the 
envoys must have received the promise of the Athenian 
nationalists to join the coalition. 

In the autumn of 266 we emerge again for a moment — 
the last for years — into the full blaze of historical daylight. 
The pro-Macedonian government in Athens has fallen, and 
-tJ^^-r pvnh itJQn Jiaft— brmigKt to the helmjiot_J2ierely_ilie- 
jiaUQJiali*t-p^rty> but the extreme wmg of it. The more 
m'SdFrarrTnEn" who Tia^d BFeTi" fespoiisible for the policy of 
neutrality of 273-271 w^ere either not in office or overborne 
by more impetuous colleagues. At h^n s- hag ^fepm allv-entfire d 

^^ Histiaia about this time was exercising one of the Ionian votes in the 
Delphic Amphiktyony. The first hieromnemon appears in the autumn of 
Pleiston's year, 266/5 Beloch ; if so, Histiaia revolted from Antigonos with 
Athens. The last appears in the autumn of Emmenidas' year, 260/59 
Beloch ; if so, Histiaia retained independence for two years after Athens' 
fall. This is difficult ; one must suppose that Egypt stipulated for this in 
the peace of 261 (see generally ch. 11). Allowing that Beloch (3, 2, 333) is 
right in his date for Nikodamos, the date of Emmenidas depends on his view 
that the Soteria was a trieteris. If, as some think, it had become an annual 
festival, Emmenidas would be 259/8, lengthening Histiaia's independence. 
But Pomtow has recently stated that some unpublished texts support the 
trieteris theory, B.Ph. W. 1910, 1092. — With this independence of Histiaia 
must be connected the long list of proxenies granted by the town, SyllP- 494, 
the date of which is circ. 264/3 ; see Beloch, /. c. ; Wilhelm, Beitrdge, p. 143. 

^^ Arnim 284. Diog. L. 7, 24 says the envoys were from Ptolemy ; Stob. 
Flor. 33, 10, from Antigonos ; Plut. Mor. 504 A gives no name. Diogenes 
is obviously right ; no agent of Antigonos would want to find out what he 
was to say about Zeno to the king. 


into an alliance with Egypt ; and the ekklesia, perhaps on the 
motion ol LhremonTd^f57taS~passe3 a decree to invite the_rest 
of Greece to follow the same policy. -''^ 

The guiding men of the new movement at Athens were 
Chremon ides, son of Eteoklcs, of the deme Aithalidai, and 
his brother Qlaukon." ^ Glaukon had been one of the men of 
the nationalist government of 288-281, and had fought against 
Antigonos ; he was apparently older than his brother, and 
had held a number of offices, as already mentioned. More 
recently Delphi had decreed him the usual honours ; his 
services to her must have been connected, either with the 
events following the retreat of the Gauls, or with the time of 
Pyrrhos' invasion, when Athens had for a while cultivated the 
goodwill of Delphi and Aetolia.^^ But, of the two, Chremo- 
ni des was the lea der. H e seems to have been noted for his 
personal beauty ; he was perhaps a pupil of Zeno ; he was at 
any rate, likr liis opponent Antigonos, a friend of both Zeno 
and Kleanthes.'" In him appears, for the first time, the 
phenomenon afterwards so common at Rome ; how the Stoic 
teaching, with its insistence ahke on true kingship and on the 
importance of the individual, impelled men to resist whomso- 
ever the}' considered a t3Tant. "" 

On the ninth day of Metageitnion 266 — about the beginning 
of September — Chremonides moved the declaration of war 
against Antigonos.-' The preamble of the resolution recited 
that in olden times Athens and Sparta had fought many a 
noble fight together against the invader who attempted to 
enslave the cities of Hellas, winning glory for themselves 
and freedom for the rest of Greece ; that the same evil days 
had again come upon Greece by the hands of men who were 
attemjLti]igJLQ--de&ti'^y-4iie^laa^^.jjT ^the anc estral constitution 
of each city :_lJ.aat King Ptolemy, followmg the policy ofTiis 
father and of his sister, was openly showing an earnest 

53 Sf//:-2i4. 

" The names of two sisters, "Ayw or "Ayvr], and Pheidostrate, are also 
known ; /. G. ii, 1369 ; Wilhelm, Beitriii^^e, p. 75. 

^^ Glaukon, ch. 4, p. 95. Decree of Delphi; Homolle in B.C.H. 1899, 
p. 547, no. 35. The archon is Erasippos, whom Pomtow placed provisionally 
in 277. 

«« Arnim 286 = Diog. L. 7, 17. " Syll} 214. 


resolve to free Greece ; that the Athenians, having allied 
themselves with him, had passed a decree to call upon the 
rest of Greece to join in the same policy ; and that the 
Spartans, the friends and allies of King Ptolemy, had passed 
a decree that they and their Peloponnesian allies (whose 
names are set forth) should be the allies of Athens, and had 
sent envoys to Athens to ratify the treaty of alliance. It 
was then formally decreed that there should be an alliance 
between Athens on the one hand and Sparta with her allies 
on the other, in order that all Greeks might be of one mind 
together, and might with a good courage fight shoulder to 
shoulder with King Ptolemy and with each other against 
those who had wronged and broken faith with their cities, 
and so save Hellas. 

It is a noble document, a fitting prelude to the last great 
struggle entered on by Athens for the liberties of hers^fiind 
of Greece. If Athens were to fall, the gods gave it to her to 
fall with all honour. "But the very words of the decree itself 
show the hopelessness of the struggle, apart from the Egyp- 
tian alliance ; the curse of the Greek race was on this war, 
as on every Greek struggle against Macedonia ; only the 
merest fraction of them could ever unite. The reference 
to Xerxes, who had been beaten by Athens and Sparta and 
their friends, in despite of the medizing states of Northern 
and Central Greece, shows how clearly this was present 
to the mind of Chremonides. There had been four chief 
military Powers in Greece. Athens and Boeotia had fought 
alone at Chaironeia, while Sparta and Aet4)lia had held aloof; 
the presence of either might have altered the world's history. 
Sparta had then fought Antipatros by herself. Sparta and 
Boeotia had taken no part in the Lamian war, of which 
Athens and Aetolia bore the brunt. In the rising of 280 
Sparta and Boeotia had fought against Antigonos ; Aetolia 
had held aloof, and Athens was too exhausted to join. Now 
Sparta and Athens were again allies ; Aetolia and Boeotia 
were strictly neutral. There_\ias-probably-BaJijii£_at whkh 
the four Powers together would not have been more th^n_a 
match for Macedonia ; to bring more than two into line at 
once seems to have been impossible. This time it was thought 


that the Egyptian alliance would supply the deficiency ; but 
casting out Satan by means of Satan has never been a hopeful 
With the passing of this decree the coalition against 
itigonos was fairly launched. He had no option but to 
takeup^ the "cHallenge ; right or w r 6 n gTgTe at Powers cannot 
aTclicate. But sympath5"w"iTTf"Atliens must not blind us to tlic 
fact that the war was forced upon Antigonos against his will. 
and at the bidding of Egypt ; Eg ypt, and not Athens, was the 
real protagonist. C hi'emonides was of course quite justifiecl" ^ 
in Jinnging up against Antigonos his policy of 'tyrants'. 
But Antigonos' policy toward a larg e part of Greece had 
been one of great moderation ; time after time he had held his 
ha li r^i tliL- Grcuk w.jrld, Includin g many cities tha t 

hau ic\uiLcd from him, wa-- a^ independent" as if Macedonia 
did np,t.£;g,s.t. His relations with Athens had been of the 
best ; with Sparta he in no wa}' interfered. What h e de 6i4'ed 
was peace for Macedonia. Bu t the re was the direct threat of 
the Egvptian pretender over his head ; he coulu nut du any- 
thing to Weaken hi-- p' i^iti'_>n a^ again-t K-ypt. Consequent!}', 
as regards Anti^un'^-- and Athen>, the war was a conflict of 
two fights ; eacli wa- ri^ht, Athens to struggle (as she 
believed) for complete independence, Antlgop \lit for 

his country's place in the wnild. 1 hat Athens, n ^uecesslul, 
would not nave gained complete independence, but would 
merely have changed suzerains, does not alter the case. We 
may leave it so, subscribing neither to the opinion of those 
extremists to whom nothing in Greek histor}' is of much 
value save the independent cit^'-state, nor to that of those 
other extremists to whom the small cit^'-state has little right 
to exist over against the stable rule of a great monarchy : 
opinions often conditioned by the political upbringing and 
environment of the writers. 

It was too late to begin operations'- in what remained of 

*' General authorities for the war: Paus. i, i, i ; i, 7. 3; 3, 6, 4-6; 
Trog. Pro/. 26; Just. 26, 2. The labours of many scholars have now pro- 
duced agreement on the main outlines. On the dating see especially Leh- 
mann-Haupt, Ji. P/i. IV. 1906, 1265 (superseding K/io, 3, 171); Kolbe, 
ArchontfHy p. 40 (1908) ; Ferguson, Athens, p. 178 seq. I5eloch, who places 
the campaign against Ale.\ander later, ends the war a good year too soon. 


the autumn of 266. Athens, however, signahzed her change 
of government by again sending a representative to the 
Amphiktyonic Council at the autumn meeting of 266 ;^''' and 
it is probable that something was done in the wa}^ of provi- 
sioning the city, a cumbersome task with the Piraeus in 
Antigonos' hands. But in the spring of 265 Antigonos 
invaded Attica with a large force, while Areus moved north- 
wards from Sparta with the troops of Sparta and the Pelopon- 
nesian League. Neither Megalopolis nor Argos appears to 
have been able to delay his march, which may render it 
doubtful if they were yet in the hands of tyrants ; ^° and he 
easil}^ reached Corinth, Here he was brought up short ; for 
Krateros' lines, based on the great fortress of Akrokorinthos, 
stretched from sea to sea ; the position could neither be 
attacked nor turned. Meanwhile the Egyptian fleet, under 
its new admiral Patroklos, son of Patron, a Macedoni an^j^ 
Kalhkrates' successor, had reached the Attic coast. But 
Patroklos found the booms down across the harbour of 
Piraeus,*'- and the town strongly held by Antigonos' garrison ; 
he took up his position at a little island off Cape Sounion, 
afterwards known as Patroklos' camp,''^ so as to co-operate 
with Areus. His base was one of the harbours in the island 

Lehmann-Haupt, Beloch, Kolbe, Ferguson, Kirchner, all agree that Syll.- 
214 was passed in 266 and the war began spring 265 ; this may now be 
regarded as certain. — The name ' Chremonidean war' is from Hegesandros 
(ap. Athen. 6, 250 f) ; probably a nickname, but convenient. 

^^ Athenian hieromnemones ; one under the archon Pleiston, autumn 266/5 
(Beloch 3, 2, 330) ; one under Athambos, who, if he preceded Pleiston as 
Beloch thought, should probably fall in 270, before the fall of the nationalist 
government of 273-270 ; and one under Damosthenes, G. D, I. 2519, the last 
probably during the course of the war. 

^° It is just possible that Megalopolis resisted in vain, and that it is to this 
war that the notice in Livy 32, 22, 10 belongs: ' Megalopolitanos avorum 
memoria pulsos ab Lacedaemoniis restituerat in patriam Antigonus.' If so, 
the restoration must be connected with Aristodemos' accession to power, 
after the battle of Corinth ; see note 84. 

^' Patroklos succeeded Kallikrates at some date between 270 and 265, 
J.H. S. 191 1, p. 255. In 270 (269) he was priest of Alexander and the Ofoi 
'AfieX^oi; Hib.Pap. i, no. 99. Ferguson, At/ums, p. 175, n. 2, thinks he was 
' Arsinoe's man '. But his appointment as admiral certainly dates after her 

"^ For the booms or chains of Piraeus see a decree from Piraeus, 'E0. '^.px• 
1900, p. 91, 1. 39; ib. 1884, p. 170, 11. 43, 46; Plut. Dem. 8; Athen. 12, 535 d ; 
Schol. to Aristoph. Pax, 144. 

®^ UarpoKKov X''P«^» Strab. 8, 398. 


of Keos, either Koressos or Poiessa, which had been, as 
already noticed, renamed Arsinoe.^^ 

National quahties seem to have a habit of adh fir'ng tP thf* 
soil of a land, even if the race changes. Centuries before, 
Assyrian captains' and 'Hebrew -prophets had declared that 
Pharaoh king of Egypt was the staff of a broken reed, 
whereon if a man leant it would go into his hand and pierce 
it;"^ and the words might have been spoken of Ptolemy II. 
The Egyptian fleet seems to have been equipped with native 
"marines 'only ;*^ it did not "i&Ven^c^-ry^~{as would have been 
Indispensable fof"serious fighting), a force of Greek mercen- 
aries, which the wealthiest power in the world could have had 
in abundance. Patr pklos was therefore unable, or professed 
himself unable, to make any serious attack on Antigonos j has" 
Eg3'ptians, he said, could not face Macedonians ; but he told 
Areus that if he would do the fighting, the fleet might land its 
marines and take Antigonos in the rear. But Areus could 
not pass Krateros' lines. It was a good example of the 
limitations of sea-power. 

Oiie of the astonishing things in the story, at first sight, is 
that Patroklos, with the unquestioned command of the sea, 
did not ship Areus' army cither across the Saronic Gulf or 
tfTe'Gulf orCorinth, and turn Krateros' position. Kassandros 
haci lung since shown that Corinth could be thus turned.*''^ 
But here Antigonos' foresight showed itself. There was 
nowhere to land. The Megarid was his, and he presumably, 
like Demetrios, held Aigosthena in strength. ^^^ Piraeus was 
his, ana with the interiur lines he could probably have 
prevented a landing at one of the open roadsteads of Attica, 
such as Marathon or Eleusis. To land in Boeotia would 
probably have forced Boeotia into Antigonos' arms ; or it may 

"* See note 44 ; and cf. O. G. I. 44, f'^ 'louX/Soy. 

'"''' 2 Kings 18, 21 = Isaiah 36, 6 ; adopted by Ezekiel, 29, 6 and 7. 

"" Paus. 3, 6, 5 makes Patroklos say that his men, being sailors and 
Egyptians, could not be expected to fight Macedonians. — Native epibatai 
in the Egyptian fleet in 480, _/. H. S. 1908, p. 208. On a landing, a large part 
of the force would be the rowers, who would have their arms. These, a little 
later, were raised in Egypt by a naval conscription, vavTua ; O. G.I. 90 (the 
Kosetta stone), 1. 17 ; the interpretation depends on the liieroglyphic and 
demotic versions. 

" Diod. 19, 54. ^'^ I. G. vii, i. 


be that his arrangement with Aetolia included some provision 
for Aetolian help in the event of a Boeotian rising. To land 
in Aetolia was of course out of the question ; no one lightly 
put a hand into that hornet's nest. LLffias^jiJ^Iemate. 

As against the allies, who could neither help Athens nor 
each other, Antigonos had the tremendous advantage both of 
.the interior lines and of knowing his own mind. He had not 
ImobilizeH his own inferior fleet, ''^ requiring all his force for 
'the land ; so he cared little for Patroklos. But the coalition 
had forced a war on him against his will; if the}' wanted 
a fight, they should have one. Leaving enough men behind 
to mask Athens, he moved with his main body through the 
Megarid '" to meet Areus. But he had enlisted a new tribe 
of Gauls for the war, in order to spare his Macedonians as 
much as possible ; and these Gauls, who did not know him, 
for once played him false. Outside Megara the}^ mutinied in 
a body, and Antigonos had after all to bring up the Macedo- 
nians ; he attacked the' mutineers, and in what is described as 
a great battle cut them to pieces.'^ But his operations for 
that year were paral3^sed ; he returned and sat down outside 
Athens, while he recruited fresh men. 

Somewhere about this time occurred ,.an-inrideat,yvhich 
illustrates Antigonos' weakness at sea. Krateros was bring- 
ing a wife for his son Alexander from somewhere in the north- 
west ; a quadrireme was sent to the Aetolian port of Naupaktos 
to convey the lady, Nikaia, to Corinth ; and the ship was 
captured by the Achaeans, whose naval strength was very 
small. They seem to have released Nikaia, but they kept 
the ship."^^ 

So came the winter. Areus and his army went home ; he 
could not keep his citizen troops together for a winter 

^° Paus. 3, 6, 4 says that Antigonos moved on Athens Trefw Tf Kn\ vnvaip ; 
this means transports, for of course he could not reach Attica altogether by 
land. But when he adds (i, i, i) that Antigonos' fleet kept the Athenians 
from the sea, he is talking nonsense ; Antigonos held Piraeus and every 
Athenian vessel that had not rotted away. It is certain that Antigonos 
required every man he had for the land operations. 

""^ See note 29. 

''^ Justin's details are worthless. But Gauls did often enlist as a tribe, 
bringing their families with them. 

" Livy 35, 26, 5 ; Beloch 3, 2, 437. 


campaign. Patroklos, too, must have gone home ; his galleys 
could not kee'p~tHe sea through the winter. Whether he 
returned the next year is not known. But at some period of 
the war, being unable to do much damage to Antigonos, he 
insulted him ; he sent him a present of fish and figs, which 
perplexed Antigonos' Council, till the king with a laugh 
ijiter preted it to mean that the Macedonians must get command 
of the sea, or starve."^ Possibly Patroklos, with his strong 
fleet, had done something in the way of cutting off Antigonos' 
supplies ; but to emphasize the fact was folly. Antigonos put 
the insult _away. in his mind with other matters ; in due time 
it was to bear fruit. This was about all that came of the 

"Tngh-sounding phrases of Egyptian diplomacy. 

But the Spartan was made of better stuff. In the spring of 
26.| Are im aprain rame northward, anrl Antigonos came south- 
ward^ to meet him. The battle took place outside the fortifica-"' 
tions of Corinth; Sparta and her allies were compl etely 
defeated, and Areus left dead on the tieTd.'* It was probably ' 

"here that Halkyoneus fell ; his name does not meet us further, 
and he was killed in some battle. Antigonos bore the loss of 
his favourite son with Stoic fortitude ; but the utterance 
attributed to him on the occasion is undoubtedly apocryphal.'^ 
The battle of Corinth was the decisive action of the war. 
It left Sparta weakened, and it broke up the Peloponnesian 
League.''*^ But it did more than this. It gave new strength 

" Phylarchos ap. Athen. 8, 334 a. = F. N. G. i, 334. Fish were a luxury, 
while figs at this time typified the very poorest food ; see Teles, Ti-epl airap- 
Kiids, p. 13, 1. 8 (Hense'^) ; Krates fr, 4 (Wachsmuth, Diels), 1. 5 ; Diog. L. 
2, 139; especially Philemon in Diog. L. 7, 27, fis (Ipros, o\j/^ov la-xus, emmuv 

'* There is a drachm of Antigonos showing obv. the head of Poseidon 
crowned with a plant like ivy, and with bays ; rev. Athene Alkis, which 
as regards types comes, therefore, half-way between the two tetradrachms, and 
may represent the transition from one to the other (Imhoof-BIumer, Mo/inaics 
grecgues, p. 124, no. 68, and p. 127). If so, the Poseidon should refer in some 
way to Corinth, and it may have been struck to commemorate the victory 
over Areus. 

" Ael. V. H. 3, 5; Plut. Mor. 119 c. Plutarch makes Antigonos say, at 
greater length, ' You have lived longer than one would have expected from 
your recklessness' ; and similar words are put by Justin, 25, 4, 10, into the 
mouth of Pyrrhos on the death of his son Ptolemaios. One cannot therefore 
credit either. — Had Halkyoneus been alive in 262, he and not Demetrios 
would have commanded the army that invaded Epeiros ; see note 83. 

'* This is obvious from the fact (among other things) that, shortly after. 


to the partisans of Antigonos at Argos and Megalopolis. 
Whether Aristodemos'was alread}' ruling in Megalopolis may 
be doubtful ; in any case his effective power dates from the 
battle of Corinth."^ The same is very likel}' true of Aristo- 
machos at Argos, though he is not actually mentioned till 
after the end of the war. Areus was succeeded in his king- 
ship at Sparta by his son Akrotatos, the hero of the defence 
against Pyrrhos ; however much^S'parta might have suffered 
from her defeat, it might be predicted with certainty that the 
fiery 3'oung man would make some effort to avenge his 
father's death. 

The appearance on the scene of a new opponent to 
'Antigonos seemed to hold out to Akrotatos some prospect of 
Ja^successfuT'campaign. Egypt, though not willing to fight 
herself, was ready enough to persuade any one else to join 
the coalition who seemed anxious to do so ; and it seems to 
have'been shortly after the battle of Corinth that Alexander 
of Epeiros took the field ; "^ his intervention a year earlier 
might have caused Antigonos considerable embarrassment. 
Alexander had come well out of his Illyrian war, and had 
recently made a friendly arrangement with Aetoha for the 
partition of Akarnania ; " that is to say, Aetolia was to help 
him to recover Akarnania, and was to receive the eastern part 
of it for her assistance. There might be some excuse for 
Alexander, for Akarnania had once belonged to Pyrrhos ; but 
the action of Aetolia w^as peculiarly shameless, seeing that 
quite recently she had entered into a treaty with Akarnania 

Akrotatos (see note 84) was not a match for Aristodemos alone. — Beloch 3, 
I, 610 notes that the League broke up ; but he can hardly be right in making 
Achaea become Antigonos' ally, as will appear when the affairs of Sikyon in 
251 are reached. 
" This follows from his defeat of Akrotatos, on which see note 84. 
_ '* Beloch 3, 2, 426 puts Alexander's attack after the end of the Chremo- 
nidean war, chiefly on the ground of Demetrios' age, but also influenced by 
his own theory of the date of the death of Demetrios the Fair, on which see 
App. 9. But Justin 26, 2, 9 ('in quo cum occupatus esset', ' reversus a 
Graecia ') is quite clear. — See note 83, and Ferguson, Athens, p. 181, n. i. 

"'"^ Polyb. 2, 45, I ; 9, 34, 7 ; Just. 26, 3, i ; 28, I, I. — A. J. Reinach, 
Jonrti. hiteni. 1911, p. 236, would put the partition not later than 265, on 
prosopographic grounds. The monument which the Aetolians set up at 
Delphi to celebrate the conquest of Akarnania (Paus. 10, 16, 6) has recently 
been identified ; Pomtow in B. Ph. IV. 1912, 540. 


which bound either state to aid the other if attacked.^*' 
Aetolia was waxing fat, with the natural consequences ; and 
this partition was one of the results of the free hand which 
Antigonos had given her. For Aetolia was presently to 
interpret her sphere as meaning, not merely the Amphik- 
tyonic States, but as much of the west coast of Greece as 
she could control ; and the partition of Akarnania was the 
first of a number of acts of brigandage which were to make 
her by -and by the best-hated state in the peninsula. The 
partition was duly carried out ; and Alexander, having re- 
established his father's kingdom, turned his thoughts to 
revenge for his father's death, a matter which fell most 
opportunel}' for Egypt. 

Alexander invaded Macedonia by the usual route through 
the Aoos pass ; he overran part of the north, where there 
were still doubtless partisans of Epeiros who joined him, and 
captured a few places.^' Butjie had neither the glamour nor 
perhaps the military talent of Pyrrhos ; and it was not difficult 
to plunder a land whose defenders were absent. x\ntigonos 
had to leave a small force before Athens and hurr}^ back to 
meet him.-- What happened is entirel}' obscure, except that 
Antigonos in a short time was sufficiently master of the 
.situati(.>n to return to .Vthcns, leaving the conduct of the war 
against Alexander to his generals, with an army placed under 

80 'E(t>.'Apx- 1905, p- 55- 

^' The story in Just. 26, 2, 10, that Antigonos' troops went over and he 
lost Macedonia, is (as the sequel shows) mere Justin, a duplicate of Pyrrhos' 
invasion inserted for the sake of the moral, which is duly drawn, 26, 2, 12. 
If it were true, how could Antigonos have left the conduct of the war to his 
lieutenants ? 

*^ Almost every historian, on the faith of Polyaen, 4, 6, 20 = Frontin. 
Strut. 3, 4, 2, repeats the story that at some time in the war Antigonos made 
a truce with Athens. If it were true, the Egj-ptian fleet would have reprovi- 
sioned the city. I think the truce belongs to 282 ; see ch. 5, n. 32. Of the 
two inscriptions which Ferguson, Athens, l8l, n. 2, assigns to this truce, 
1. C. ii, 5, 616 b is entirely local to Piraeus, and requires no truce to explain 
it ; Piraeus was in Antigonos' hands, and cannot have been much affected 
by the war, especially in July 262, when certainly Patroklos' fleet was away. 
I.e. ii, 310 is most uncertain; see Priests, 151. Ferguson now follows 
Koehler; but it is a strong measure to place it twenty-eight years after the 
other decree for Aischron, /. G. ii, 309, especially as in 290 Aischron was a 
man of weight, and therefore not young. Even if 'AiTtTrciTJpoii be inevitable 
in the other inscription on the same stone, it does not follow that both 
decrees belong to the same time merely because they are on one stone. And 
anyhow /. G. ii, 310 refers to a peace, not a truce. Possibly 282/1. 


the nominal command of the crown prince Pemetrios, his son 
by Phila, a lad of not more than twelve or thirteen years old. 
This army met Alexander at a place called Derdia in Eleimiotis, 
beat him decisively, and invaded Epeiros ; Alexander was 
driven from his kingdom, and all danger from that quarter 
was at an end for the time being.^^ 

It was in all probability while Antigonos was engaged in 
the North that Sparta made one more hopeless effort to aid 
Athens ; it isquite probable that Akrotatos and Alexander 
were definiteTyco-operating. Akrotatos, hciwever, could com- 
mand onl}'- a weak force, for he no longer had the Peloponne- 
sian League behind him; and he never reached the Isthmus, 
if that was his objective. He was met by Aristodemos of 
Megalopolis, completely defeated, and killed in the battle.^^ 

^' Just. 26, 2, 1 1-3, I. — Certainly Demetrios the crown prince, and not 
Demetrios the Fair. I have shown elsewhere {/.M.S. 1909, p. 265) the 
pains which Trogus took to distinguish people of the same name ; and here 
we have in two consecutive paragraphs of Justin (26, 2, 11, and 3, 3), ' huius 
filius Demetrius ' and ' Demetrium, fratrem regis Antigoni ' ; and I cannot 
undertake to say that this is not a correct copy of Trogus. — Demetrios II 
could have been born in 276 at the earliest. He is. it is true, called ^(ipaKiov, 
a lad, in 247 (Plut. Arat. 17, probably from Phylarchos) ; but this must be 
set aside, for he was married in 253 (see ch. 12). He was therefore about 
thirteen, probably, in 263, and his presence with the army quite possible. 
Perseus held a similar 'command' at thirteen, Livy 31, 28. — Antigonos' 
campaign against Alexander must fall in 263 ; that of Demetrios may be 
either 263 or 262 ; there is no certainty. On Derdia (Euseb. I, 243, Schoene) 
see Droysen ^ 3, i, 238, n. 2. 

^* Plut. A(^is, 3. — The date is settled by an important inscription from 
Delphi, published by E. Bourguet, B. CH. 191 1, p. 488 ; AeXcp-n ehcoKav 'Apd 
l^aaiKe'i lSaa[i]\\f(os 'AKpOTi'irov Ka\\i\wvi{8)o[s | j3]naL\i(T(Tris avrwi Kni (Ky6voi[s] \ 
Trpo^eviau Trpofj-aVTelav 7rpo[e] Spi'av TipoBiKiav dtri'A/ai' ^[I'jejpyfcriar, up^ofTos 'Ep.- 
pevil^n, /^oiXfun'tTcoj' (breaks off). This is Areus II ; and as Emmenidas' year 
is in all probability 260/59 (Beloch's date ; see ch. 7, n. 147, and ch. 10, n. 51), 
Akrotatos fell in the Chremonidean war, and not somewhat later (Beloch 3, 
ii, 114 places his death on other grounds about 260), and Aristodemos con- 
sequently came into power at Megalopolis after the battle of Corinth, at the 
latest. [Pomtow in A//i. Mitt. 1906, p. 482, calls Emmenidas 266/5, but 
gives no reasons ; this inscription makes that date impossible, for the death 
of Areus I and consequent accession of Akrotatos in 264 are now well settled.] 
— E. Bourguet, in publishing the inscription, decides it must belong to 
Areus I, solely on the ground that descendants of A..reus are mentioned, and 
Areus II died in childhood. But a grant to a man and his heirs does not 
import that he has any heirs, either in English or Greek ; I need not labour 
the point. To make out his case, Bourguet has to suppose (i) a second and 
unknown Delphic archon Emmenidas ; (2) that Akrotatos, father of Areus I, 
who was never king, was nevertheless called king ; (3) that, like his grand- 
son, he married an (unknown) Chilonis (a very rare name ; Pape gives two 
instances only) ; (4) that this Chilonis, though not queen, was nevertheless 


It was some years before Sparta could move again, and for 
a time she ceased altogether to be a force in the world's 
politics. On the other hand, his_victory gave Aristodemos a 
considerable increase of both prestige and power. That he 
was popular in Megalopolis is obvious, or he could not have 
fought the battle at all.^^ He was now able to include in his 
dominions a large part of Arkadia ; ^*^ he adorned his city with 
temples ;^^ and out of the spoils of Sparta he built a pillared 
hall in the market-place of Megalopolis.'^"^ 

Meanwhile Antigonos had returned to Athens, and taken 
charge of the operations there. Whatever had been the case 
during the campaigning season of 263, from the winter of 
263/2 the siege was vigorously pressed. No further help was 
to be exacted. Both Sparta and Epeiros had been thoroughly" 
beaten, and Egypt was already' in 262 turning her attention 
elsewhere.^^ Athens was thrown back on herself. She must 
have been provisioned for such a contingenc}' ; otherv/ise she 
could never have resisted as she did. Legends clustered 
about the doomed city ; the aged poet Philemon, who died at 
Piraeus during the siege, saw in a vision, the night before his 
death, nine maidens leaving his house, and when he asked 
them whither they went, the Muses replied that they must 
not stay to witness the fall of Athens.^" Men saw in the w ar 
ihe end of an. epoch ; and it was by the mouth of one who 
remembe red the glorious days of Demosthenes that the,, 

called queen. — It is clearly Areus II, son of the Akrotatos and the Chilonis 
well known from Plutarch's Pyrrhos. — While one cannot say in which of the 
two years, 263 or 262, Akrotatos fell, the former is much more probable. — 
Paus. 8, 27, II. and 30, 7 has a version of the defeat and death of Akrotatos 
at the hands of Aristodemos, in which the Akrotatos is the father of Areus I, 
and the Aristodemos two generations before Lydiades. If it be a mere 
blunder, it is a very circumstantial one. I have no idea what it means. 

*' He could never have withdrawn all his mercenaries from the town. It 
would seem, too, that to defeat Sparta he must have had the co-operation of 
the citizen troops. 

"' If the Arkadian League, formed after his death, included the same 

*^ Paus. 8, 32, 4, and 35, 5. ^* Paus. 8, 30, 7. 

*' For the actions of Egypt see ch. 11, p. 313. 

"" Suidas, Philemon. (His death was probably in 263/2, but 264/3 is pos- 
sible. The reckoning is intricate, and nothing now turns on it.) — Connected 
with this legend about the Muses may be the story, which rests on poor 
authority (Paus. i, 30, 4), that Antigonos burnt the grove at Kolonos, which 
they loved {Oed. Col. 691). 


Immortals foretold her fate to their beloved home ."^ The city 
"^ held out to the uttermost,"- but her spirit was greater than her 
strength ; hunger did its work at the end; and some time in 
the winter of 262/1, four years from the commencement of the 
war, Athens surrendered."^ 

With the surrender ended, once and for al l, the perio d 
during which AthefiS'had been a polittcat"ToFce"in the world : 
for thirt3'-two years the once imperial city was to be, in fact 
if not always in name, a dependenc}- of Macedonia. The war 
had been forced upon Antigonos against his will ; and he 
determined, very properly from the point of view of his own 
kingdom, that he w^ould see to it that, so far as possible, he 
should never have to fight another of the sort. Leniency he 

Hhad formerly shown in plent}^ ; but the day for leniency was 
past. There were no reprisals ; Chremonides and Glaukon 
were merel}' sent, or allowed to escape, into exile ; they found 
refuge in Egypt, and no doubt with them went other leaders 
of the national resistance."* But the city Antigonos took into 
his own hands. He refortified the Mouseion, and placed 

'1 Niebuhr, Kl. Schriften, p. 463. 

'^ PaUS. 3, 6, 6, fVl flOKpOTflTOV. 

^^ The material passages of ApoUodoros' chronicle, with Cronert's readings, 
are printed Beloch 3, 2. 39 and 424; Ferguson, Priests, 153. — Kolbe's idea 
{Archonteti, p. 40 seq.) that the year 262/1 was divided between the archons 
Antipatros and Arrheneides would present an arrangement without parallel, 
for in all the changes of government known the eponymous archon was, for 
obvious reasons, re-elected. In view of Ferguson's note, At/ie?is, p. 182, 
n. I, I need only say that it was always perfectly clear that Ferguson was 
right in maintaining, against Kolbe, that the year 262/1 was ftot the only 
possible one for Arrheneides. On ApoUodoros' figures for Zeno's scholar- 
chate, it is a question of simple arithmetic. A. Mayer, ' Die Chronologie des 
Zenon und Kleanthes,' Philol. 71, p. 211, follows Kolbe, dividing the year 
262/1, but has no new reason. — The surrender. Kolbe, pp. 39-45, dates it 
July-Sept. 262. Ferguson formerly {Priests, 154), 'late fall of 262 at the 
earliest.' Lehmann-Haupt {B.Ph. IV. 1906, 1265), springor early summer 261. 
Ferguson now [Athefis, 181) agrees with Lehmann-Haupt, putting it about 
March 261 on the strength of Polyaen. 4, 6. 10, which I think belongs else- 
where (see n. 82). All that can, I think, be said for certain is, some time in 
262/1 and probably in the winter, because of ' the division of dedications to 
Asclepius in /. G. ii, 836, 36fif., between Phileas and Calliades, the priests of 
Asclepius before and after the fall of Athens in 262/1 B.C.' (Ferguson, 
Athetis, iSi, n. 3). On this division, which I think Ferguson proved in 
Priests, see Kirchner in B. Ph. W. 1909, 844, 847, against Kolbe's criticism, 
op. c, p. 6 seq. 

®* Teles, TTfpi (jivyris, p. 23 (Hense ''j. For other possible Athenian exiles 
see Ferguson, At/iens, 188, n. i. 


a strong garrison there ; ^^ he garrisoned all the Attic forts ; ^® 
he removed all the existing magistrates from office,^" and 
himself, following a precedent set by his father Demetrios, 
nominate3~"tlie new ones : ^^ nothing remained to the people 
but to confirm the men of his choice. That they should 
belong to the pro-Macedonian party was a matter of course : 
and as a descendant of Demetrios of Phaleron— a man honest 
at any rate in his speech— was one of the new ma.gistrsites,^'^ /4<(f '^^'^ 
we see how completely the pro-Macedonian party had absorbed ^ 
the extreme oligarchs. Even offices which were religious and 
not political, such as the priesthood of Asklepios, changed 
hands ; '"" the sole exception was the epon3^mous archon, 
Antipatros, who, in pursuance of an unbroken precedent, was 
retained in office, the inconvenience of any other course being 
glaring.^"^ So far as. form went, however, the S3'stem of 
administration was altered, if at all, in one respect onl}- : it 
w;i-. [xrha]:),^ nr^w tliat the gem ralship for home defence was 
divided into two separate commands, a recognition ot the fact I 
that the Piraeus, which separated the two halves of it, hadi/ 
become pcfmanently Macedonian.''"" ' 

So far as form went ; for in fact the administration was 
reduced to insignificance. Not only were all the Antigonid 

'^ Apollodoros, /. c. ; Paus. 3, 6, 6 ; cf. Euseb. 2, 120, Schoene. 

"" Piraeus, Mounychia, and Salamis were, and remained, in Antigonos' own 
hands ; /. G. ii, 5, 591 b = Syll? 220 ; Plut. Arat. 34. So did Sounion, Plut. 
/. c. ; and if Sounion, probably Rhamnous also, i. e. the whole of the X'^P" h 
■nnpnVia \ I. G. ii, 1194 = SylL^ 498 and Kirchner in Ath. Mitt. 1907, p. 470; 
A. Wilhelm in 'K(/x 'Apx- 1892, p. 147, no. 35, and Beitrdge, no. 42. On the 
other hand, under Demetrios II I£leusis, Phyle, and Panakton were garrisoned 
by Athens with citizens and mercenaries (/. G. ii, 5, 614 b = Syll!'' 192) and 
the strategos of Piraeus had nothing to do with them (silence of Plut. Arat. 
34). Antigonos must have garrisoned them to start with and handed them 
back to Athens together with the Mouseion. — This difYers somewhat from 
Ferguson ; see Klio, 9, p. 318 ; Athens., p. 183, n. i. 

"'' Apollodoros, /. c. 

'* This really follows from the fact that he governed the city through an 
epistates (n. 103) ; but there is express evidence for one magistracy in Hege- 
sand. ap. Athen. 4, 167 f. Demetrios must have been nominating magistrates 
for some time prior to his fall in 288, for Plut. Dcm. 46 says that on that 
event the Athenians voted (Ipxovras alptlcrBai TrdAtf axrirfp ^v TniTptov (read 
Trdrpini' with (upeia-dai, i.e. restoration of choice by lot ; the statement about 
(TTOivvpni rests on a mistake). 

°" Hcgesandros, /. f. ''"' Ferguson, /^//Vi-/^, 139 seq. 

'"' So Ferguson and Kirchner as against Kolbe ; see n. 93. 

"" Ferguson, A7/o, 9, p. 318; Athens, 183. 

X 2 


forces in Attica placed in the hands of one strategos, who 
represented the former strategos of the Piraeus with enlarged 
powers, but Antigonos also appointed an epistates or governor 
of Athens itself, and apparently governed the city very much 
as he govei-ned Thessalonike.^"" Whether the two offices 
were in one man's hand, or whether they were held by two 
different persons, cannot be ascertained ; neither is it known 
who held either, though the strategos in command may well 
have been Hierokles, the former strategos of the Piraeus. 
This method of governing Athens worked one very important 
change. It would seem, from the cessation of the Athenian 

^decrees, tliat the ekklesia can have ti ad no initiafive apart 
from the epistates, unless in the most purely local concerns ; 
he may Kave even introduced the resolutions which the}' 
were to pass, as was done, for instance, by the epistates at 
Thessalonike. The only decree known to have been passed 
at this time at Athens was passed at Antigonos' express 
request. Very damaging, too, to Athens was the abolition of 
the right of coinage. Antigonos' silver tetradrachms — the 
type with Pan's head on a Macedonian shield — replaced at 
Athens the well-known coins which for so long had carried 
the city goddess and her owl far and wide over the world. 
Coins were still struck at Athens, but not her ^wn ; she was 
henceforth a Macedonian min t. _and struck Antigonos' tetra- 
drachms. Athens' commercial supremacy had long been 
a vanishing tradition ; the loss of her coinage may have given 
it the final blow.^"* 

^ It was indeed the end of an epoch ; and it was marked in 

^^ 1 apprehend that Apollodoros' words, r«? ap^as [ai")ipr/o-^]nt Knl nav ev\l] 
l3ov\ev[fiv ? e(p]e'icr6ni, import that Antigonos down to 256/5 governed Athens 
directly through an epistates, very much as he governed, e. g. Thessalonike 
(ch. 7, n. 98). Ferguson suggested that Hierokles became the strategos of 
Antigonos in Attica ; unless he was also epistates of Athens, a possible can- 
didate for the latter post would be Thrason of Anakai. 

■ ^°* Koehler's view [Silsutigsb. d. Berl. Akad. 1896, p. 1089 ; cf. Ferguson, 
Athens^ 184) that Athens did continue to coin after 322, seems now admitted. 
But Head in his second edition, p. 378, thinks that the number of autono- 
mous coins struck at Athens at this time was small. Note, however, that out 
of a hoard of eighty-six coins in Lakonia, formed about the end of the third 
century, no less than forty-two are Athenian tetradrachms (A. J. B. Wace, 
B.S.A. 14, 1907-8, p. 149 seq.). Antigonos' tetradrachms first appear at 
Athens in 261/60; it is thought that those with the calathus were struck at 
Athens ; see ch. 7, n. 20. 


dramatic fashion b}' the death of Zeno. He was the last 
among t kelnjuds " uf thr great aohools wh o, during the past 
forty years, had made Athens famous ; with his death, all 
had passed into new hands. Epicurus had died in 271 ; 
Straton, the successor of Theophrastos as head of the 
Peripatetics, a year or two later; Polemon of the Academy in 
268/7, ^^ ^ great age, and his friend and successor K rates ver}- 
shortly after. Zeno alone of that brilliant company had 
survived to witness the struggle between his two pupils and 
the overthrow of his home b}' his friend, with what feelings 
who can sa}'. He was not a very old man, being only 
seventy-two when he died ; but the story goes that he took 
a slight accident which happened to him to be a sign that his 
time was come, and ended his life b}' voluntary starvation. 
His death can be dated to some time between July and 
October 261,^"'' a few months after the surrender. 

For thirt3'-nine years he had taught at Athens ; and the 
Athenians had recognized the worth of this stranger within 
their gates, and had come to hold in high honour one whom 
the}' knew to be the friend of their enemy, because they 
likewise knew him to be a noble man. The stor}' that they 
entrusted the cit}- ke3's to him for safe custod}- is not likely 
to be true. But a crown of gold and a decree of honour had 
been voted him during his life ; ^'^'^ and now that he was dead 
the Athenians erected a bronze statue to his memory, and at 
Antigonos' request, conveyed through an Athenian, Thrason 
of Anakai, gave him a public funeral in the Kerameikos. 
Antigonos himself honoured and lamented his friend by 
quoting over him a phrase made current b}' Zeno's great 

''■' Zeno died in Anheneides' year (Apollod. /.c.) 261/60 (see n. 93). The 
Athenian decree voting him a tomb in the Kerameikos (cf. Paus. i, 29, 15) 
was passed the twenty-first day of the fifth month of that year (Diog. L. 7, 
10) ; he therefore died some time in July-October 261. He was seventy-two 
years old (Persaios ap. Diog. L. 7, 2S ; other versions can be neglected). 

'** That is, if the decree which we have, Diog. L. 7, 10-12, be really com- 
posed of two decrees (Beloch 3, i, 466, n. 3; see Susemihl i, 54, n. 186); it 
does not appear how a gold crown could have been voted to him after death. 
But the bulk of the document we have certainly represents the genuine decree 
passed after his death. It is rated highly, but not too highly, by Wiiamowitz, 
Antigonos, p. 232. It is extraordinary that any one ever thought it a 
forger)' ; only a man touched by strong feeling could have written the pre- 


rival ; with Zeno, he said, he had ' lost his audience '.^"'' The 
things he had had to do were not always of a nature to be 
popular with the gallery ; but Zeno had understood, and if 
his approval were won, what mattered the others ? But none 
but Athens could have paid to the dead Phoenician the tribute 
of the beautiful words that have come down to us. Antigonos' 
friend, Thrason of Anakai, who drafted the decree w^hereby 
Athens honoured the dead, after recalling the many 3'ears 
which Zeno had spent in the service of philosophy and the 
insistency with which he had always urged the young to 
strive after virtue and temperance, said simply, ' He made his 
life a pattern to all ; for he followed his own teaching.' ^"^ 

"*'' Diog. L. 7, 15, XeyfToi . . . (Ine'iu tuv 'Avriyovov, olov eiq Qiarpov aTToXcoXf- 
Kojy. A priori, one distrusts the genuineness of such remarks. But of this 
one there can be no doubt ; not merely because it is from Antigonos of 
Karystos (Wilamowitz, /. c, 232, who accepts it on this ground), but because 
it is virtually a quotation from Epicurus, who said (the Greek equivalent of) 
'satis magnum alter alteri theatrum sumus ' (fr. 208, Usener); a philoso- 
pher need not play to the gallery or seek the applause of the mob (ttpos ox^ov 
Ka\ dearpop, Ps. Plat. Axiock., p. 370 D ; see Hense, Teles", p. Ixx) ; it is enough 
if another philosopher approve him ; such a one is audience enough. Anti- 
gonos may also have had in mind Plat. Po/ii. 260 C, the king himself is not 
a dfaTijs, one of the audience, the implication being that he must have an 
audience. — It is a pity that one has to change the metaphor in EngHsh. 

''* napd8(Lyfxii Tuv 'i8iov fiiov (KOiii cnraau', uKoXovdov ovra Toii Xdyois oU 



To write any real history of the eight years from 261 to 
253 is frankly impossible. All connected tradition is lost ; 
even the Athenian inscriptions fail utterly until after 256/5 ; 
the meaning, and often the date, of each isolated event is a 
subject of controversy. All that can be done is to note 
certain points, and indicate what seems, on present materials, 
to be the likeliest method of joining them together. But the 
attempt has to be made ; and no one will take the result, 
however expressed, to be other than largely hypothetical. 

The preceding narrative has carried the story down to the 
surrender of Athens, ^o far as Antigono s was concerrLed, 
this ended the war ; it ^iTTo'nFtrat^d thatTon land, he had 

completely mastered the formidable coalition formed against 
him. The principal members of that coalition had been 
Athens, Sparta, Epeiros, and Egypt ; and his measures for 
dealing with Athens have already been described. With 
Sparta he had no measures to take ; the Peloponnesian 
League had broken up, and peace would be Sparta's most 
urgent need for some years. But he had to settle with 
Epeiros ; and Demetrios' victory and Alexander's flight from 
his kingdom had put him in a position to exact what terms 
he pleased. After Pyrrhos' death he had been scrupulously 
considerate ; he had taken no compensation either in men, 
money, or territory. But it was clear now that he could not 
risk another attack of.tlie. sort from behind ; and he knew that 
so long as the gorge of the Aoos, the famous ' Narrows ' which 
formed the portal of Macedonia on the north-west and were' 
compared to Tempe,^ was in Epeirot hands, there could be 
no certainty of lasting peace. It is possible that he actually 

' See ch. 9, n. 15. 



now governed Epeiros for a little while ; at any rate it must 
have been at this time that he restored the ancient boundaries 
of Macedonia, and gave back to her, not only Parauaia and 
Tymphaia," but also Atintania,'' which had belonged to Kas- 
sandros though not to Demetrios. The possession of this 
latter province drove a wedge between Epeiros and Illyria 
and gave Antigonos access to the Adriatic ; and it also gave 
him the Aoos pass, the ke}' to his own kingdom. To secure 
the pass, he founded his second name-city, Antigoneia on the 
Aoos,'* doubtless as the seat of the strategos of the new pro- 
vince. Epeiros never troubled Macedonia again. 

The settlenrent with Epeiros no doubt took place in 262/1, 
or at latest in the year after. There remains to be considered 

'^ Beloch places the recovery of these two provinces of Macedonia after 
Pyrrhos' death (3, 2, 315, a full discussion). But I cannot reconcile a 
dismemberment of Epeiros with Antigonos' other actions at that time ; 
I therefore place the recovery here, for I think Beloch has shown it cannot 
be later. 

^ So Niese 2, 238; and see ch. 13, p. 368, where Antigonos has a garrison 
at a point on the Adriatic coast. — Beloch (3, 2, 316-17) believed that Atin- 
tania was still Epeirot in 229, and that consequently Antigoneia on the Aoos 
was founded by Pyrrhos. This is important. The question turns on the 
meaning of Poiyb. 2, 5. That the beaten Epeirots fly ws- in ' Ativtcivmv 
shows, not that Atintania was theirs, but that it might provide a refuge of 
some sort. That the Epeirots had previously detached a corps napti(f)vXd- 
^ovras rrjv 'Avnyovuav does not prove that Antigoneia belonged to them ; for 
irapcK^vKaTTdv or iTnpn(l>v\aTT((T6iu in Polybios does not as a rule mean, as 
Beloch says, ' zum Schutz gegen Feinde besetzt halten' (I only know one 
possible instance, 4, 72)i 0) but means simply ' to keep an eye on '. As this is 
the real point, 1 must prove it. Polyb. 4, 3, 7, Dorimachos is sent by the 
Aetolians TrapacpvXa^cciv T7]i' re ;^cupai' Kcil ti]v ttoKiv tSuv ^iyn\iu)V. The sequel 
shows that he was only a Resident, without any troops. 5, 92, 8, Aratos 
raises 1,100 men Trapa(pvXnTTea6(n Messenia, the Argolid, and the territory of 
Megalopolis and Tegea, while with the picked troops of Achaea and their 
mercenaries he intends Tjjpeiv those parts of Achaea exposed to Aetolia; 
i. e. with a large force he guards a small territory, with a tiny force he ' keeps 
an eye on' half the Peloponnese. 18, 3, 1 1, and 4, 6, Alexander Isios asks 
Philip dui tI . . . Kardcrxoi- 4>povpaTt)v ttoXii' (Lysimacheia) — why he garrisoned 
it. Philip replies, 'My men were not garrisoning it, as you allege; they 
were keeping an eye on it,' Trapa(f)v\dTToi'Tas. 7, 3, 9, napfcfivXnTToi' {nvn} 
u>s TToXepuiy, ' kept watch on ' ; I, 36, 9, nnp^pvKaTTOv tov eTTinXovf tcov ivavr'uov, 
'watched for' ; 7, 16, 7, to be on one's guard against reinforcements ; 16, 14, 
10, to be on one's guard against certain writers ; 2, 58, 2, to watch over the 
freedom of a town. — I hope this is enough to show that there is no reason 
for believing that Antigoneia on the Aoos was anything but an Antigonid 

* Antigoneia, no. i in Staph. Byz. ; cf. Pliny, AL H. 4, i (i) Antigonenses. 
Whether its territory technically belonged to Chaonia (Steph.) or Atintania 
(Polyb. 2, 5) is not material ; it is part of what Antigonos took. 


the last and most important member of the coaHtion, Egypt ; 
and here it will be necessary to go back a Httle and explain ' 
the cause of Egypt's inaction toward the end of the siege of 
Athens, ^frTnactron' which may seem to have been no less 
confcpary to her self-interest than derogatory to her honour. 
For Egyp t, unlike . Sparta and Epeiros. had not been defeated 
Uiy Antiyonos. She had not suffered in the war ; on her had 

Ij ^len no ne of the fighting. ..She. had nn 1 '^I^J^r d"^p"*-Y j m 

when the process failed, she simply withdrew. "1 lie cause of 
her withdrawal seems merely to have been that a more pro- 
mising opening had presented itself elsewhere. 

It must be borne in mind that the Chremonidean war WRS> 
Arsinoe's war ; ^ she had in tended to employ the forces of 
Lg}'pt for the purpose of forwarding her son's claim to the 

throne o\ ^^lacedonia. Had she hved, her extraordinary 
"^energy might have given the struggle another aspect. But 
Arsinoe was dead and comfortably deified ; and though the 
train which she had commenced to lay was laid and exploded, 
so much cold water had been thrown on it in the interval 
that the explosion, so far as Egypt went, was rather a damp 
affair. It was not in human nature that Philadelphos, with 
sons of his own, should continue to be so greatly concerned 
for the son of Arsinoe ; and no doubt there was a strong 
party at court engaged in urging on him the claims of the 
rightful heir, and suggesting that the venerable goddess, 
lately deceased, had not said the last word on Egyptian 
policy. Eg ypt, it was are^ued. need not ^ r^t^tly concern 
herself with Macedonia ; Antigonos' navy w ^"^ a nep-ligihle 
quantity, and he was Jikely to remam too fully occupied on 
■land to think of chafferigmg Egypt s possession oi ttie sea. 
"But the military power 'bt nail Asia was not a negligible 
quantity, and Antiochos was only too likely to use the first 
opportunity of challenging Egypt's possession of Hollow 
Syria, a province which Antiochos claimed as his of right, 
and which was vital to the wealth and prosperity of Eg3-pt ; 
was it not the gateway of much of the trade of inner Asia? 
Egypt's true policy was to keep her e3'es firmly fixed on this 
danger-point, and to take every opportunity of weakening 
» 5)'//.- 214, 1. 17. 

3t4 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

Antiochos, whose resources, unwieldy and scattered as they 
were, were nevertheless very great. 

Ptolemy himself must, as will appear, have inclined to this 
view ; and some time in 263/2 the opportunity offered itself. 
Philetairos of Pergamon, who after Lysimachos' death had 
established his independence, but had always remained on 
excellent terms with Antiochos I, died, either in 263 or 262 ; 
and his nephew and successor, Eumenes T. made a prompt 
change in his relationship with the king of Syria. How the 
war Between these two started, we do not know; but it must 
have broken out almost at once. Eumenes was wealthy, and 
no doubt followed the usual course of hiring Gauls; but 
Gauls were equall}^ at Antiochos' service, and the great dis- 
parity in the strength of the two shows that Eumenes must 
have had some further foundation for his confidence. As 
Antiochos was on very good terms with Antigonos, Eumenes 
naturally tamed to Egypt;'" nu doubt he had arranged 
matters with Egypt beforehand, possibl}^ even before Phile- 
tairos was dead ; for the war must have followed very 
promptl}' on his accession. Athens was left to endure her 
death agon\' un.aid£d.;-tliere was something better now foP 
j^Patroklos to do than to levy toll on fishing-boats in order to 
send Antigonos presents. The allies won prompt success, 
for a Seleukid mobilization was a slow matter ; these kings 
were rarely able to bring their strength to bear till a war had 
been some little while in progress. Eumenes on land pene- 
trated as far as Sardis, and there defeated Antiochos in open 
field under the walls of the great fortress." Meanwhile the 
Egyptian fleet, waging a war of limited liabilit}- (for Antiochos 
had no fleet to speak ol), swept the coast northward from its 
base at Samos ; and several of the Ionian towns, including 
not onl}' Miletos but the great cit}' and seaport of Ephesos, 

"^ Important in this respect is the foundation of Philetairos or Eumenes I 
of the Philetaireia at Delos, the first vase of which appears under Elpines, 
262 (Schulhof in B.C.H. 1908, p. 106). It can only have been founded 
by a friend of Egypt ; and the same applies to the other associations of 
Eumenes I and Delos, e.g. his statue there (HomoUe, Archives, 61 j 
and the setting up at Delos of O. G. I. 266. He went there under Egypt's 

"^ Strab. 13, 624. 


fell into Egyptian hands.- All these cities had once belonged 
to Lysimachos, and had passed to Seleukos after Kouroupe- 
dion ; and it is likely that they all contained elements hostile 
to the rule of the Seleukid, men who were prepared to 
welcome, as successor to Lysimachos' rights, the country of 
which Lysimachos' son was now co-regent.'^ 

When the good understanding between Antiochos and 
Antigonos is considered, it is natural to ask_wii.e];jtl-er ..Lgypt^ 
"m withdrawing from Europe in order to support Eumenes in 
"Asia, Was not really acting both in her own defence ^and-Jn- 
loyalty to her allies ; that is to say, whether in 263 Antiochos 
was not preparing to intervene on Antigonos' behalf, making 
the struggle world wide. But it seems impossible to support 
this view ; for Eumenes was clearly the aggr essor. Had 
Antiochos ~TDeen preparing to intervene on behalf of his 
brother-in-law, he would not have been caught so entirely 

Ai3lii:)ch(Ks did n(jt long survive his defeat ; he died at some 
tijTie in 262/1, and was succeeded by his sun Antiochos II. 
This king's accession w^as followed b}' a general peace.''" 

^ Ionia was not acquired by Egypt in the first Syrian war, as its omission 
in Theoc. 17, 86-90 shows ; and Ephesos was Seleukid near the end of the 
reign of Antiochos I, Michel 4S6. At the same time Ephesos and Miletos 
were Egyptian at some time prior to the revolt of Ptolemaios son of 
Lysimachos in 258 ; and I agree with Beloch that they can only have been 
taken in Eumenes' war (3, i, 614, n. i ). Sec generally, on Egypt and Ionia, 
Beloch 3. 2, 271 to 276. 

'•' See App. 7, pp. 445, 446, on this identification. 

'" The Delian choragic inscriptions open as a rule with the formula eVt toD 
df'ivn ("ipxovTos iyUut kch (v(Tr}f)ia iyivfTo. Of the fifteen known prior to 190S, 
eight show this formula (six in B. C. H. 1883, p. 103 seq., one in B. C.H. 9, 
p. 146, and one in B. C.J/. 1904, p. 14?, no. 42) ; five are broken away, or 
mere fragments (three in B. C. H. 1883, p. 103 seq., and two in B. C. H. 1905, 
p. 515, no. 170, and p. 520, no. 174 ; see E. Schulhof in B. C. H. 1908, p. 58) ; 
and two have no formulae at all (in B. C. H. 18S3, p. 103). But recently two 
exceptions have been published : one by Schulhof in B. C. H. 1908, p. 57, 
no. 10, a fragment of the year of the archon Paches (255 HomoUe), in which 
the formula reads [i)-yut« fiiejTT/pia eipijn; f'-yeVeTo ; the other by Dilrrbach in 
B.C.H. 1911, p. 36, no. 17, of Tharsynon's year (261 Homolle), with the 
formula vylna eljjrjvr] ttXovtos fyiviro. Diirrbach thinks that these two formulae 
do not represent real historic events. This will be settled if other similar 
inscriptions arc found showing flpijvr] in the formula ; but on the material 
before us to-day I cannot treat it as a mere coincidence that out of ten such 
inscriptions with formulae preserved two mention ' peace ', and that these two 
coincide in date, one with the surrender of Athens, the other with the with- 
drawal by Antigonos of his garrison from the Mouseion. (On the adoption 
in this book of Homoile's dates for the Delian archons of Antigonos' reign. 

3i6 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

Af|-Li^j:^£r4rTH jllt;^ fallpn^ anri A-TTtw^°M^4:Lti.Jvvns qill'tP rPH'^ly f^^4=-fl 

peace that should secure to him both what he had won and 
the opportunity of quietly carrying out the necessary re- 
organization at Athens and elsewhere. Egypt had nothing- 
more to fight for in Europe, and had compensated herself 
for her loss of prestige in Greece by her territorial acquisitions 
in Asia. Antiochos II was not ready for war; he had losses 
to repair, but he needed time. A. ^eneral cessation of ho s- 
tilities between the three Powers followed. ^^ Antigonos, as 
\Yas natural in view of his success, was the one to benefit 
most; for one term of t|ie peace between himself and .Fgy.I>t 
se ems to have been that Ptolemy should cease to support the 
L claim of- Lysimachos' son to the throne of Macedonia.'^ As 
Antigonos, who could not reach Ptolemy, could never have 
enforced such a stipulation, it must be supposed that it was a 
condition pleasing to Ptolemy himself; it gave him a good 
excuse for ridding himself of Arsinoe's son and restoring his 
own son to the second place in the empire. And Ptolemy 

see App. II.) There is no a ^rzVW difficulty in a reference to a real peace 
in such an inscription ; see Sy/l} 140, a long inscription from Delphi con- 
taining accounts of the vcwnoioi, divided into archon years, where one section, 
the archon year of Damoxenos, is distinguished by the added words (1. 71), 
eVet a elpr^vn eyevero (346, Dittenberger). And a very striking parallel to the 
Delian inscriptions has recently come to light. In Mtisee Beige, vol. xv, 
191 1, pp. 256, 257, P. Graindor published a new inscription from Tenos, an 
archon list divided into columns. Col. I he assigns to the beginning of the 
second century B. c. This column runs in two-line paragraphs, the first line 
giving the archon's name and patronymic, the second his tribe. But one 
name has an accompanying statement. After the name in 11. 7 and 8, 
. . . uxos 'S.'uxov [0vX]^y Qpvrjaidos, we read (11. 9 to II) ['E;rt] tovtov rjv \yyi]eic., 
flpi]vr], (v([Tr]p]ia, evvo/iia. The addition of these words to one name in a 
mere list of names must surely represent a real fact. — I conclude therefore 
that we have to reckon with two ' peaces ' at this time, one in 261 and one in 
255 (262 and 256 being also possible), each of which affected Delos in some 
way (precisely as the end of the Sacred War affected Delphi) ; that is to say, 
Ptolemy II, the master of Delos, must in each case have been one of the 
parties to the peace. If this be well founded, the fragmentary events of 261 
to 256 must be marshalled afresh accordingly. — See Addenda. 

" If Ptolemy had remained at war with o/ie great Power, Delos could 
hardly have emphasized ' peace '. 

^^ A deduction from the virtual banishment of Lysimachos' son which 
followed. Ferguson, Athens, 189, supposes that Antigonos stipulated that he 
should be removed from the co-regency. This is on iiis supposition that the 
peace fell circ. 259. If it is 261, this cannot be ; for according to the Revenne 
papyrus the co-regency lasted two years longer, till 259/8, which I take to 
be the date of Ptolemaios' revolt at Ephesos. — For another possible term 
of this peace, see p. 320 and ch. 10, n. 51. 




did in fact rid himself most effectually of Ptolemaios by 
appointing him to the governorship of Ephesos and the other 
Egyptian acquisitions in Ionia, which had once belonged to 
his father Lysimachos. 

The pe^r f 1a«ifr<^rl }mi«- a lii-Hf whilp. It seems to have been 
in 259 that the wars between the three great Powers blazed 
out again, though it is quite possible that hostilities had even 
commenced the year before. The ashes of the Chr^^ mopi'^^^" 
^ar may have n e\er ceased to smoulder; while it cannot be_ 
^coincidence that Ptolemaios at Ephesos revolted and wa§ 
aeprivea of the co-regency in the same year (259 8) which 
saw tne "^activity of Demetrios the Fair at Cyrener As 
Ptolemaios can only have revolted with Antiochos' support, 
as Antiochos was friendly to Antigonos, and as Athens was 
simmering with discontent, the most probable view to take is 
that by 259 Anti ochos II had completed his preparations and 

j^as ready to attempt the recovery of what his father had 
lost, and that coincidont iy wim tne outpreak ot His war \vi!h 
Eg3'pt, which is sometimes called the second Syrian, came 

-frp'^h h ostilities, of a sort, between Egvpt and Antigonos, or 
rather between their fespecti\e friends, piobillJly yiUI'Liiil T5y 
the intrigues or supposed intrigues of Eg\-pt atTlthens^ The 
twij wars lasted down to about 256 ; but the central problem, 
whether Antiochos and Antigonos were definitel}^ co-operating, 
is one at present incapable of solution. The}' could onl}^ have 
aided each other indirectl}', in any case, as the Egyptian fleet 
would have absolutely hindered communication ; but, though 
evidence is wanting, we may suspect that the}' had at least 
a good understanding.^" A connected narrative of the two 
wars is not possible ; all that can be done is to mention a 
number of events which belong to this period, 259-256, but 
which cannot be properly ordered in chronological sequence. 
Antiochos II appears in the tradition as a drunken sot, and 
his ministers figure as something worse ; but in fact what can 
be made out of his actions at this time shows that his govern- 
ment was capable and energetic ; and once the war began he 
waged it with vigour and success, bringing up large forces 

*' The sort of entente, falling short of ov^hmxm, which was known as 


3i8 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

from the eastern provinces of his huge empire. He found 
an unexpected all}' in L3'simachos' son. Ptolemaios saw that, 
as the result of the Chremonidean war, all chance of the 
throne of Macedonia was lost to him for ever. He also 
understood that he had virtuall}' been banished from Alex- 
andria to the government of a by no means extensive set 
of possessions, while Philadelphos' own son, afterwards 
Ptolem}' HI, was back in favour at court.^* He determined 
to do what he could for himself, and with Antiochos' aid he 
declared himself independent of Egypt. His counsellor was 
an Aetolian soldier of fortune named Timarchos, who was 
probabh' an officer in the Ptolemaic service governing for 
him in Miletos. The garrisons of the towns under Ptole- 
maios' control naturally consisted of mercenaries who had 
either taken the oath to him personally or were won over ; 
and Antiochos sent him some Thracians to stiffen his men. 
Timarchos, too, was a man of energy ; he crossed from Asia 
to some populous island, probabl}' Samos, and compelled his 
men to victor}' by adopting Agathokles' stratagem of burning 
his boats. ^"^ 

But Lysimachos' son did not long enjoy his new^i 
His tenure of it may indeed have been \'-ery brief, for it does 
not appear that Egypt moved against him ; but of course the 
record is too broken to speak with certainty. The Thracians 
plotted his overthrow ; he fled to the temple of Artemis with 
his mistress Irene, where both were cut down ; the city was 
handed over to Antiochos. Timarchos seized the reins in 
Miletos and made himself tyrant ; the Milesians were well 
plundered to pay his mercenaries ; and when Antiochos suc- 
ceeded in overthrowing him, the grateful citizens deified the 
king of Asia, who was thenceforth known as Antiochos the 
god.^'' The rest of the Ptolemaic possessions in Ionia fell to 

" This really follows from his betrothal to Magas" daughter Berenike just 
before Magas' death. On the date see App. 9. 

'^ Ptolemaios' revolt, Trog. Fro/. 26. Timarchos aids the revolt, ib. ; rules 
at Miletos, App. Svr. 65 ; crosses to (?) Samos, Frontin. 3, 2, 11 ; burns his 
boats, Polyaen. 5. 25. The Thracians, Athen. 13, 593 b, would naturally be 
recruited by the power that controlled the Thracian coast. 

"^ Ptolemaios' death, Athen. /. c. Timarchos' overthrow ; App. Sjr. 65 ; 
O. G.I. 226. The Timarchos who appears in an inscription of Miletos as 
minister of Antiochos Epiphanes might be his grandson. 


Antiochos with the two great cities. The Egyptian fleet 
apparently did nothing ; it was probably engaged in trying to 
retake Samos, but at any rate the Egyptian admiral was in a 
dilemma ; he could neither aid the rebel Timarchos to resist 
Antiochos, nor the enemy Antiochos to put down Timarchos ; 
and he certainl}^ could not storm a city like Miletos in defiance 
of both. The whole affair was probably over at latest by 
about 256;^'' Egj'pt had sustained a shrewd blow, and with 
the death of Ptolemaios there vanished the last of the pre- 
tenclers to the crown of'Macedonia. 

Meanwhile Ptolemy had not been altogether idle in Europe. 
Probably one of his first acts i n_the war was the restoration 
(^j LAlpYandpr to the throne of Epeiros.^ - "Alexander, driven 
out of his kingdom by Antigonos' son Demetrios, had taken 
refuge in Akarnania ; the motive of this step is obscure, for 
he had apparently just treated the country very badly. It is 
not known, however, on what terms he held it. If by 
garrisons and the strong hand, his action is explicable. If, 
on the other hand, he were titular head of the Akarnanian 
League, somewhat as Antigonos was of the Thessalian 
League, his action must perhaps be referred to the strong 
national feeling of the Akarnanians against Aetolia ; the 
Macedonian king, Aetolia's friend, was perhaps actually 
ruling in Epeiros, and that part of Akarnania which was not 
Aetolian may have considered that Alexander's rule was 
preferable to any of the apparent alternatives. His restora- 
tion to the throne of Epeiros was no doubt a gain to Ptolemy ; 
but both his prestige and his country's power were much" 
impaired, and he was in no condition to attack Antigonos 

At Athens, even under the rule of a powerful Macedonian 

" It cannot be said liow long Ptolemaios, and Timarchos after him, main- 
tained themselves; the 'terminus post quern non ' is the peace of 255. 

"* Justin 26, 3, I. It is of course quite uncertain how long Alexander's 
'exile' — i.e. his rule in Akarnania alone — lasted. Ferguson, Alliens, p. 181, 
n. I, thought that he was restored to Epeiros before the peace which con- 
cluded the Chremonidean war. This is quite possible ; what has decided 
me to place the event later is, that Alexander's defeat by Demetrios most 
probably fell in 262, and from then till after peace was made Egypt was 
fully occupied elsewhere. She abandoned Athens ; would she have interfered 
in Epeiros ? 

320 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

gowrnor, things were not altogether quiet. The war party, 
the nationahsts, may still have been strong in the cit}^ ; and 
at some date that cannot be ver}- long after 261, and should 
, therefore belong to this war of 2SQ, _some of the extreme 
jnembers-W.ere -agatft-4Titrig:uing — &c— az ^re accused ot TTr- 
triguing — ^with Eg3'pt._ Let Egypt act as she would, nothing 
.could alter the fact that she alone held in her hand the t wo 
1 things needful, corn and gold, This time Antigono s tog k 
jl strong measures; Philochoros, seer and historian, was exe- 
cuted for treason," and it is not likely that he was the only 
person implicated. The hist ory of the city for the next thirt y 
3'ears would appear to show that it had been very thorou^h ly^ 
purged [ and no doubt any strong members of the war party 
who yet remained were banished. As the war party would 
include some of the best and most capable citizens, Athens 
must have been weakened in the process ; and her later 
history shows that she never really recovered from the 
crushing blows she had received. Material prosperity, a kind 
of freedom, a continued supremacy in philosophy — these 
were yet to be hers ; but never again, save perhaps in Sulla's 
siege, were men at Athens to know the glory of having 
struggled to the uttermost, even though in vain. 

Histiaia in Euboea seems to have managed to retain its 
independence for a 3^ear or two after the fall of Athens ; its 
hieromnemones appear at Delphi down to 259 or 258. Pos- 
sibly its independence had been one of the conditions of the 
peace of 261 ; but during the present war, whether conquered 
or otherwise, it seems to have fallen into line with the rest of 
Euboea and again become subject to Antigonos.^*' 
~ArrttgQiioshad in the late war restored the r^ld hnnndg; -nf 
Macedon ia m almost every direction. But Paionia was still 
independent, and thrust a great block of alien territory down 
the course of the chief river of Macedonia, the Axios. How 
and when Antigonos acquired Paionia is quite obscure ; it 
ma}^ have been either at this time, or perhaps after the war 
with Alexander of Corinth ; probably the country joined one 

'' Suidas, PJiilocho7-os.- This shows it was not long after 261. 
^^ The town appears with an Amphiktyonic vote till 260/59 (259/8 is also 
possible); see ch. 10, n. 51. 


of the coalitions formed against Antigonos, just as Audoleon 
had joined the coalition of 288 against Demetrios. It is 
almost certain, however, t|iatitsj;e-abs orpt ion b}' Macedonia I 
belongs to some period in the reign of Gonatas ; for the coins * 
show that Dropion left no successor, and he cannot well have 
reigned till the time of Antigonos Doson. It may therefore 
be mentioned here for completeness. The country h ajjjnor^- 
than once belonged to Macedonia, and rounded that kingdom 
ofr~\vith a" yer}^ important acquisitipn_QOHxJlQ^L]alQngIi^ 
no rthern_frojitier. For the seat of the strategos nf ^^^ "^"^ 
province Antigonos founded his third name-city^ Antigoneia. 
o~n the Axios ; i t was somewnat soutn ot Stoboi, and no doubt 
commanded the entrance to the ' Iron Gates ', the pass 
through which the Axios flowed, and which gave access from 
Paionia to Macedonia.-^ Whether Antigonos pushed still 
farther to the north-east, and brought the countr}- of the 
Agrianes under his rule, is quite unknown. They had once, 
for a time75een incorporated in Macedonia ; but all that can 
be said for certain is that the}' were independent in the time 
of Antigonos Doson.-^ 

V ery early in the war — probably in 2^q — an opportunity 
presented itself to Antigonos of inflicting considerable, if 

jndirect, damage upon Ptoleni}'. An actual attack on him 
without a strong fleet was not possible ; but the occasion that 

^now offered itself was one of promise. Gyrene had never 
taken kindly to EgNptian rule ; and it has already been related 
how Magas, who governed C3'rene for Eg3'pt down to 274, 
rebelled in that year and, in concert with Antiochos I, brought 
on the struggle known as the first Syrian war. Magas must 

-' Pliny, .'V. //. 4, 10 (17) ; Peutinger table ; not in Steph. Byz. The town 
is not in Droysen's well-known list, though given by Beloch 3, i, 372 ; but 
Pliny is quite clear, 'oppidum Stobi, niox Antigonea, Europus ad A.xium 
amneni ' ; he follows the river down. — This foundation and the cessation of 
the Paionian kings are the evidence for Paionia again becoming Mace- 
donian. It must have happened in Gonatas' reign ; if in Doson's, Dropion 
must have reigned at least fifty years ; this is almost impossible, for he began 
by reorganizing a country shattered by the Gauls, and cannot well have been 
a very young man at the time. — On the pass see Strabo 7, 329, fr. 4 ; Ober- 
hummer, ' Axios ' in P. IV. 

^'- They appear as a separate force in Doson's army at Sellasia. But it is 
possible that their country became subject to Gonatas and lost again on the 
death of Demetrios II. 

322 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

have had the support of the strong party in Cyrene that was 
hostile to the Egyptian connexion ; and the result of the war, 
so far as the Cyrenaica was concerned^ was 4ihat the country™ 
practically won its independence ; Magas was recognized as 
king, subject to some sort of vague Egyptian overlordship. 
He w^as a half-brother of Ptolemy H, being a son of Berenike 
by her first marriage ; and his wife Apame, a daughter of Antio- 
chos I and Stratonike, was not only sister of Antiochos H 
but niece of Antigonos.-'' Magas died at some time shortly 
after the taking of Athens by Antigonos, probabl}' in 259,-* 
leaving no son to succeed him, but an only daughter Bere- 
nike, who cannot well have been more than fourteen years 
old at the time. It seems that, when he knew his end was 
at hand, he felt a desire to terminate all cause of quarrel 
between the two kingdoms, and betrothed Berenike to the 
eldest son of Ptolemy II, afterwards Ptolemy III : -' a circum- 
sTance that shows that this Ptolemy was at the lime considered 
certain to be the successor to the throne of Egypt, and that 
Arsinoe's son, if not yet actually in revolt, was looked upon 
as discarded by his appointment as governor of the Ionian 
towns, as he seems himself to have recognized. 

The betrothal of Berenike to the heir of the throne of 
Eg3'pt did not suit either the nationalist party in Cyrene or 
the queen-mother Apame. It is evident that there were two^ 
'parties in the country ; and as the projected marriage was 
pleasing to the party that favoured Egypt, Apame naturally 
turned to her own people. Doubtless with the approval of 
the anti-Egyptian or nationalist party, she sent to Antigonos, 
offering Berenike's hand and kingdom to his half-brother 
Demetrios the Fair; as he was a grandson of Ptolemy I 
through his mother Ptolemais, it was doubtless thought that 
this might weigh with the philo-Egyptian opposition. Deme- 
trios started at once ; a fair wind and a swift ship enabled 
him to evade any Egyptian cruisers ; he reached Cyrene in 
safety. The traditional version of what happened is some- 
what as follows. Though a capable soldier, Demetrios lost 
no time, once Antigonos' hand was removed, in showing that 

'* Paus. I, 7, 3. " See App. 9. 

" Just. 26, 3, 2. 



ll£_\va> a '-on of the Besieger in other things beside mihtary, 
ability. He began with a successful campaign against Egypt 
in Libya ; -'' hu t after t his he treated the court of Cyrene 
with contempt and the troops with despotic harshness ; he 
also sHghted the Httle Berenike, and made love to her mother 
Apame, who was not much older than himself and was 
attracted by his good looks. The result was that the Eg3'ptian 
party in Cyrene, under the lead of Berenike, rose against 
him and slew him in Apame's bedchamber ; Berenike secured 
that her mother's life should be spared.-' 

But all the details of this story are absolutel}- untrustworth}-, 
as Justin's moral embellishments usually are. Demetrios 
^as alread3- the father of a son who was to be the greatest \ 
statesm an of his age ; and it is not at all likel}' that the fathex. 1 [/\^ 
of A ntigonos Doson was politically incapable. The only \ 
facts for which good evidence exists are, that Demetrios 
became king of Cyrene and died,-^ and that Berenike, when 
a small girl, did sonief/iing which a court poet could call 
extraordinar}^ and speak of as removing some obstacle to her 
future marriage with Ptolemy HL-" As it is quite certain 
from contemporary evidence that Demetrios never married 
Berenike,-'" who was the legitimate heiress to the throne, and 
as it is equally certain that he was for a time king of Cyrene, 
it is cle ar that what he reall}' did do was to execute a coup 
'ci'ht af,'\ with the support of the nationalist party and no 

^® Demetrios' Libyan war, Euseb. Schoene I, 237 os koi naa-av Tfjv Ai^vrjv 
fKa&f, of course with the inevitable confusion with Demetrios II. 

" Just. 26, 3, 3-8. 

^^ Doson's inscriptions, in which he calls himself son of A'///g- Demetrios, 
show that he was king somewhere ; B. C. H. 1907, p. 94 (the Sellasia Inscrip- 
tion from Delos) ; B.C.H. 1S96, p. 135, from Mantineia. (That this last is 
correctly filled up by P^ougeres is shown, not only by Polyb. 5, 9, 10, but by 
another Doson inscription published by H. J. W. Tillyard and A. J. B. Wace, 
/>'. S.A. No. xi, p. 1 1 1, no. 1 1, from Geraki ; BacnXe'ov ' kvji-yovov Swr^poj.) The 
place of whicli he was king was Cyrene ; Plut. Don. 53, Trog. Prol. 26, 
Euseb. Schoene i, 237. 

^' Catull. 66 (= Kallimachos), 11. 26-8. Berenike's independence of 
character is also shown by the story in .A.el. V. H. 14, 43. If the statue at 
Athens, figured by Svoronos, _/(?//;7/. Intern. I, 228 and 7riVa| 1', be really 
Berenike in middle age, as he suggests, she had a masculine and determined 

'" Catull. 66, 1. 14, ' virgineis exuviis.' 

^' One could have guessed this from Trogus 26, ' occupato regno.' One of 
the many difficulties into which Beloch has fallen by displacing the date 

Y 2 

324 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

doubt of Apame, who saw her way to being again queen ; 
thereupon the Egyptian party removed him by assassination, 
with Berenike's privity. It is not the only case in history 
"where an event whosejnainspring was political- has been 
turned into a story of passion ; it may be added that it is by 
no means certain that Demetrios was ever even betrothed to 
Berenike. Itas certain, however, that with his death a con- 
siderable opportunity was lost to Antigonos. 
.—Demetrios' death probably occurred in 258, not long after 
the revolt of Lysimachos' son at Ephesos. It formed a set- 
off to the death of the Egyptian claimant to the Macedonian 
throne, and it brought to Egypt a very real gain of power. 
For Cyrene, for a little while, now came (it seems) substanti- 
ally under Ptolemy's rule. The friends of Eg3^pt, who had 
killed Demetrios, threw themselves and their country into 
Ptolemy's arms, perhaps from fear of the nationahsts and 
Antigonos ; and though Berenike was queen in name, she 
was betrothed to Ptolemy's son, and Ptolemy made him in 
the meantime the real ruler of the country, with the name of 
king, working of course in Egypt's interest.-"-^ This advantage 
undoubtedly made it more easy for Egypt to negotiate. For 
things had not been going any too well with Egypt in Asia. 
Not merely had Antiochos recovered Ionia, but he had 
succeeded in occupying Pamphylia and that part of Kilikia 
which had previously belonged to Egypt,^^ and had managed 
to slip transports across the narrow sea and capture Samo- 
thrake,"^ important as a religious centre. Egypt seems to have 
retaken Samos,^^ but that was all. In Asia she had been 

of Demetrios' death is that he has to make Doneirios summon Ekdemos and 
Demophanes and give Cyrene freedom (3, i, 640). See App. 9. 

^^ See App. 9 for all this. 

^^ This seems to follow from this, that Pamphylia and (part of) Kilikia 
were Ptolemaic circ. 270 (Theoc. 17, 88), while Ptolemy III conquered \h^vc\. 
((9.6^.7.54,1. 15). The only alternative would be, that Ptolemy II gave 
them as part of Berenike's dower, which is not likely. See generally Beloch 
3, 2, 263 seq., who, however, discredits alike O. G. I. 54 and the Seleukid 

^* This follows from Antiochos II setting up O. G. I. 225 there in 253 ; see 
/. G. xii, 8, p. 38. Of course the possessions of Samothrake on the mainland 
were at his mercy. 

^^ B. M. Inscr. iii, 403 does not, I think, show that Samos was for a time 
Seleukid, as Niese 2, 135, n. 8, and Beloch 3, 2, 276, thought. The mention 


definitely weakened, and must have realized that she had 
undert aKen more than she conld carry through, and that a 
genuine peace would be desirable. Antiochos may have 
been willing enough to make peace, provided that it secured 
to him his considerable conquests. The result was the peace 
oF 255 (or perhaps 256),"'' which must, so far as concerns 
Ptoleni}^ and Antiochos, have been a peace between them on 
thebasi's"bTThe'5/rt?//5 quo. How far the peace reached is not 
known ; but undoubtedly it included Antigonos. For though 
the new war between Egypt and Macedonia had only been 
waged by the friends of each, still the execution of Philochoros 
shows clearly enough that .the two principals were on terms 
ofjiostilit}', even though they could not reach each other; 
and subsequent events, notably the actions of Antigonos at 
Athens and in regard to Bith3mia, prove that he must have 
been a party to the treaty, quite apart from the fact that a' 
Delian inscription could hardly emphasize ' peace ' if Ptolemy 
still remained at war with Macedonia, 

Antigonos had now a very different position from any that 
he had ever heretofore occupied. He had gained heavily by 
these ten years of war. He had restored, or was in the way 
to res tore, to Mace donia the most extended boundaries that 
she had ever known ; but, more important than that, he had 
at last secured the loyalty of the Macedonian people. The 
steady work of years had borne fruit ; save in a few cases 
near the Epeirot frontier, his people had supported him 
loyally, and he had even been able to entrust the end of the 
struggle with Alexander to an army with which he himself 
was not present. He might at last consider himself firm on 
the throne. Long, too, as his two wars had lasted, they had 
probably exhausted Macedonia less than would have been 
the case with many other countries, seeing how self-contained i^ 
and self-supporting it was ; and though the Macedonian \\ 

of Antiochos II in 11. 132 and 151 is a mere method of dating, and a natural 
one, since Priene was also concerned. See Bevan, House of Seleuctts, i, 
175, n. 4. 

^^ See n. 10. Without a peace Antiochos could never have retained 
Samothrake. Those who make its loss to Egypt a result of the battle of 
Kos have never explained why it should have fallen to Antiochos and not to 

326 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

jtroops had been compelled to fight three considerable battles, 
leach had been a decisive victoiy, and their losses ma}' not 
have been great. Sparta and Epeiros had both been conclu- 
'sively beaten ; neither was likely to be dangerous again for 
3'ears. All the pretenders to his throne were dead, unless 
Alexander of Epeiros can be reckoned as such, and Alexander 
was in no position to attack him again. Antigonos' arrange- 
ment with Aetolia had been tested b}?- events, and had held 
good. Athens, and ever3^thing that Athens implied, belonged 
to him ; and it had been demonstrated to completeness that 
Eg3'pt could not herself conduct an offensive war against 
Macedonia. Above all, Egypt had no further claims on the 
Macedonia ii crown . In Peloponnese, Antigonos was popular 
in the Argolid ; ^" and it appeared as if his friends in the 
peninsula were now powerful enough to hold his enemies in 
check. Even his system of tyrants, the weak spot in his 
armour, appeared to be justifjnng itself in the hands of Aris- 
Fodemos of Megalopolis. On land, Antigonos had reached 
his zenith. He had laboured hard ; it began to look as if he 
were about to enter into the fruits of his labours. 

Peace then was made, and in due course the world saw 
the extraordinar}' spectacle of Antigonos and Ptolem}^ working 
hand in hand. Nikomedes of Bithynia died somewhere about 
this time, leaving children by two marriages and his kingdom 
to the younger family : anticipating that the son of his first 
marriage, Ziaelas, would make trouble, he named Antigonos 
and Ptolemy joint guardians of the infanlsj^logether with the 
cities of B3'zantion, Herakleia, and Kios. Ziaelas of course 
raised an army of Gauls and invaded Bith^'nia; the Bith3'nians 
obtained troops from the children's guardians, and after a 
good deal of fighting an arrangement was come to through 
the mediation of Herakleia, which, however, gave Ziaelas the 
kingdom. The sole importance of the episode, in a history 
of Antigonos, is that it is the only occasion known on which 
Antigonos, since he became king of Macedonia, interfered in 
any wa3' in Asia, and the only occasion in histor3^, so far as 

^~ A decree of Epidauros in his honour, /. G. iv, 1419. Perhaps now, 
perhaps after Pyrrhos' death. Gonatas and not Doson, /. H. S. 1909, 
p. 270, n. 39. 


is known, on which troops of the Antigonid and the Lagid, 
even if only mercenaries, fought on the same side.'-^ 

The greatest gainer by the peace was, however, Athens. 
Antigonos, from the strong position he had achieved, felt that 
he could now afford to treat the beaten and weakened city 
with a little less severity. It has been suggested that among 
others who petitioned him on the subject was Aristomachos 
of Argos. All danger seemed over, and as soon as peace 
was concluded, he restored full self-government to the city ; 
the Macedonian epistates was removed, and the garrison 
withdrawn from Athens herself, that is to sa}', from the 
Mouseion."^ This was the garrison which pressed most 
severely on the city ; it was constantly before all men's eyes. 
With the withdrawal of the Macedonian governor there was 
some rearrangement of commands ; or, rather, a return was 
made to the system that had existed before the Chremonidean 
war. Hierokles no longer meets us ; whether he was dead 
or superannuated cannot be said. But Piraeus, with the fort 
of Mounychia, was again placed in the hands of a separate 
strategos, who held, in addition, ' the fortresses that go with 
Piraeus,' Salamis and Sounion. The new strategos of Piraeus 
was that Herakleitos of Athmonon whom we have already 
met as agonothetes of the Great Panathenaia in 274 and as 
a zealous adherent of Antigonos. He had held some post 
under Antigonos in the interv^al ; possibly he had been 
governor of Salamis in the yeai"s 261-255 ; he was popular 
in Salamis and perhaps in Athens, and no doubt it was con- 
sidered that the Athenians would find his appointment less 
galling than that of a stranger.'*" As Hierokles before him, 

'^ iMemnon 22. — This enables a narrowing of the limits for the death of 
Nikomedes from some time between 264 and shortly before 247 (on the 
various theories, R. Herzog, A//i. Miit. 30, 1905, 173 seq.), to some time in 
the period when Antigonos and Ptolemy were really at peace, circ. 255-253. 

^"^ Paus. 3, 6, 6 for the fact. The date is from Eusebios, and is confirmed 
by the date of the first gift made by the people of Athens to Asklepios after 
the war; see Ferguson, Priests^ p. 147, n. 29; Athens, p. 191 ; Kirchner, 
/)'. P/i. IV. 1909, 847. I do not know any ground for Ferguson's statement 
that the Athenians tried to get Arkesilaos to intercede for them with the 
king ; but he may well be right that Aristomachos helped them ; he did 
something ^ax Athenian freedom, /. G. ii, 5, 371 c. 

*" See ch. 7, n. 160, — Decree of the Salaminians for him, /. G. ii, 5, 591 b 
= Syll? 220. Beside Piraeus, he was strategos ru>v 'iKkvtv rav TarTOfifvuv fjitrh 

328 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

he was entirel}' independent of Krateros at Corinth, and 
reiponsible directly to the king. In his hand were the keys 
of Athens from the side of the sea ; Antigonos knew well 
enough that he had not yet finished witlTTTgypt. What w^fT 
done with the forts of Eleusis, Panakton, and Pliyle is not 
known ; it is very likely that Antigonos handed them back to 
Athens with the Mouseiori/' 

It was an altered Athdns that received back the right of 
self-government. A great generation had passed away, and 
their successors were hardly the equals of the men who were 
gone. The fitful freedom of the forty years preceding the 
Chremonidean war, interspersed though it was with periods 
of foreign rule, had at least been life ; and Athens had been 
the home of a large number of men who, if not always great 
men in the proper sense, were at least notable personalities, 
men of mark in thejr time, bearing the impress pjLjiL-age 
¥ ept aT stretch b}' the continued cksh of arms and interests 
which had centred round the city. ] Now Athens had peace^. 
such fighting as she was to do in the next twenty-five years 
was done for, and under the aegis of, her mastei: ; but she had 
a master, and the peace was like the peace of death. She was 
mot again to be an independent force in the world's politics; 
'land the beginnings can perhaps be detected of the process 
ft)}' which she would ultimately cease to be a force in the^ 
World's thought. Zeno's death had indeed come at the part- 
ing of two epochs. It was~not merel}^ that many of the 
strongest statesmen had gone into exile ; for the alteration 
was equally marked in the spheres of literature and philo- 
^-EIiI'- There was no great historian now in Athens; 
Philochoros was dead, and Timaips dead or gone to Sicily ; 
Phylarchos did not write, apparently, till after Athens re- 

Tov Ueipaiecos ', see Plut. Am/. 34 and ch. lo, n. 96. He had previously been 
nnpa rcoi i3a(riXei ' \vt lylo]^^ TeTnyiJ.evos ; as he had repaired the forts on 
Salamis, which were in ruins, I imagine he was governor of Salamis from 
261 to 256. Ferguson {Athens, 192) says that his new position approximated 
to that of Demetrios of Phaleron. But as I understand it, the office of 
epistates of Athens (see ch. 10, n. 103) lasted only from 261 to 256; Hera- 
kleitos in 256 became Antigonos' ^^;/^r^?/, but he was not (so far as 1 can see) 
epistates of Athens, nor did he hold any post in the Athenian government ; 
Athens was {i/iform) again ' free '. 
*^ See ch. 10, n. 96. 



covered a kind of freedom in 229 ; KHo loved free, air. There 
was no one to replace Menander , Philemon, and the other 
prominent comedians who were dead or dropping out one by 
one ; th e New Comedy ha d seen its best days ; poor as it 
was in some respects, it retained enough of the old tradition 
of Comedy to love free air also. Philosophy' was different ; 
no externals could make a slave of the philosopher who knew 
in his own soul that he was free. Y et in philoso phy also^ as 
kQ .literature and politics, there was a change. It has happened 
before now that, in this or that country, conquest has called 
out, b\- wa}- of i-eaction, a more intense intellectual fervour in 
jhe co nquered, leading to manifestations which have restored 
their country's place in the world ; but nothing of the sort 
happened, nor could it well have happened, at At hens. Athen s 
was growing old ; she seems no longer to have had ille 
Strength to bring any great^^e\v_thing to the birtTT! It is true 
tlTaTone of the most notable of the^pHiToiopTnc movements of 
antiquity was yet to come, and to come from Athens ; but it 
was to be no longer positive and creative, but critical and 
destructive. Spring and summer were over ; and the 
autumn sunshine already gave presage of the frosts to come. 
But autum n has its own charm ; and the philosophers of-the 
new generation at Athens, if not the equals of those who 
~\Vere"gone, merit more than a passing glance.- The balance 
of the schools had entirely changed ; two of the four had 
broken in half, and the dominant personality in Athens no 
longer belonged to the Stoa. Ep icurus' school was un- 
changed ; his successor, Hermarchos, was a man of no note 
in himself, but a faithful friend of the master to whose teaching 
the school clung and was to cling without alteration or growth. 
Aristotle's school was shattered: a nd Hieronymosof Rhodes,^- 
reprcsented to us as a poor ill-natured creature, but not with- 
7. Ill wits, who had hankerings after EpicufeanisnT, was leading 
till -I cession from Straton's official successor L3'kon.'';' That 
ilieir should have been a secession is perhaps not surprising ; 
for Lykon's chief title to fame is that he succeeded, during 

■•^ Susemihl i, 148. 

*^ Lykon ; Life in Diog. L., bk. 5 ; Antigonos of Karystos ap. Athen. 12, 
547 d; Wilamowitz, Afitigouos, p. 78 seq. ; .Susemihl i, 146. 

330 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

his long tenure of the scholarchate, in reducing Aristotle's 
once great school to an insignificance wHlch lasted, witH"5nef 
intermission, for a couple of centuries. If tradition be true, 
"he was indeed a curious kind of philosopher. He had been 
an athlete, well known as a wrestler, a boxer, and a tennis- 
player ; and he became a devotee of the luxury of the table. 
His extravagant banquets, to which his pupils had to contri- 
bute, made membership of the school a prohibitive luxury to 
any but the wealthy ; and the banquets themselves were 
symposia, not of wit or learning, but of eating and drinking. 
But he had his good points. He t ook m uch interest in the 
early education of boys ; he often gave advice on affairs to 
his fellow-citizens, and his advice was always sound. His 
lengthy will reveals a character both business-like and 
generous ; by it he liberated his numerous slaves, and charged 
his heir with the education of one of them who was a minor. 

Thp nfrhpr gphr>rt1 whjrh ha d broken in two was Zeno' s. The 
official headship rested with Kleanthes.'*^ He was a man of 
sterling personal worth, who in youth had shrunk from no 
hardship or privation that he might earn enough during the 
night just to live while attending Zeno's lectures by day ; even 
his rivals esteemed him highly. But he was slow-witted, 
and never became a force in philosophy ; his importance to 
Stoicism consisted in the fact that he received the torch from 
Zeno and handed it on to Chrysippos. One gift, however, 
was his. If not a great philosopher, he was a truepoet ; and 
his Hymn to the World- Power whom the SToics called by the 
popular name of Zeus, with the wonderful lines which not 
only recall one of the best-known images in Isaiah but into 
which we can read, if we wish, a very modern and un-Hellenic 
feeling for those who appear to be failures,"*' marks the 
highest point which Greek religious poetry ever reached. 

Ariston of Chios ***' led the secession from Kl eanth es. 
Though inferior to the latter in character, he was far superior 
in commonplace ability, and succeeded in making himself a 

** See ch. S, p. 231. 

■"^ Line 14, dXXu av Ka\ rh Tvepiaaa fTrlaraa-ai cipTin delvni, Ka\ Koafielu TuKoafin 
K(i\ ov (})iXa cro'i (/u'Aa €(jtli'. — ' The crooked shall be made straight, and the 
rough places plain.' 

*" Ch. 8, p. 231. 


position in Athens second only to that of Arkesilaos. But he 
failed to found an independent school, which may seem to 
argue that he had no particular originalit}-; and his greatest 
merit was to have_taught Eratosthenes.'*^ 

Politically, the Stoa and the ColOTinade had almost changed 
places at Athens. The former, to Ant'gonos, was represented 
b3- Persaios at Pella ; and there is no record that Kleanthes 
was ever a personal friend of the king, though Antigonos was 
said to have once given him a large sum of mone}', no doubt 
(if the story be true) that he might no longer have to work for 
^his living.^* But Kleanthes had been a friend of Chremo- 
nides ;^^ and with Athens taken, Chremonides banished, and . 

Zeno dead, the Stoa turned away from Macedonia. Ptolemy *"^ ^'^'^ 
invited Kleanthes to cumc to Alexandria, or, if he could not 
come, to send a pupil ; and as Chrysippos would not leave 
Athens, Kleanthes sent Sphairos of Bosporos, a man who 
afterwards had the distinction of being the teacher and friend 
of another great enemy of Macedonia, Kleomenes III of 
Sparta.^''^ Eratosthenes too, Ariston's pupil, was to become 
one of the greatest ornaments of the Museum at Alexandria. 
On the other hand, L3'kon abandoned the traditional attitude 
of Aristotle's school. That school had always been Macedo- 
nian in feeling, but their Macedonia was that of Kassandros ; 
they had never been friends of the Antigonid, but on the fall 
of Demetrios of Phaleron had turned to Egypt. This atti- 
tude had lasted throughout Straton's life ; he had been the 
tutor of Ptolemy II, and had corresponded with Arsinoe.'^^ 
But the Macedonia of Kassandros was a vanished tradition ; 
\vl7at remained OT ffie extreme oligarchic faction that in the old 
*^ays had supported him had long since amalgamated with che 
'niodernpro- Macedonian party that supported Antigonos ; a 

*'' The account of Ariston's high place in Athens comes only from his own 
pupil Eratosthenes (Strab. I, 15; Athen. 7, 281 c). But Eratosthenes could be 
emphatic on his failings, Athen. /.c. His alleged flattery of Persaios, because 
he stood near Antigonos (Athen. 6, 251 c), is merely from Timon's Silloi, and 
inay be disregarded. 

** Diog. L. 7, 169 ; possibly untrue. Antigonos may have made the offer, 
and been refused. 

" Diog. L. 7, 17. 

'"' lb. 7, 185, 177 ; Athen. 8, 354 e; Plut. Klcoiii. 2. For the various dates 
involved see Susemihl i, 73, n. 296. 

"*' Diog. L. 5, 60. 

332 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

descendant of Demetrios of Phaleron had been one of Anti- 
gonos' nominees for a magistracy. AhQve all, Antigonos' 
s(;^ar was in the ascendant. Both sections of Aristotle's school 
made their peace with him. It is intimated that Antigonos, 
who had had nothing to do with Straton, knew Lykon well, 
and found a charm, which would not bear transplanting on to 
paper, in the fragrance and grace of his conversation; ''^ while 
the philosopher contributed 200 drachmai to the war fund 
raised b}' Athens when she fought for Demetrios II against 

^ut the most notable figure in Athens for twenty years after 
her fall was Arkesilaos,^"* Knates' successor as head-Qf.ilie 
Academ}^ Like Kleanthes of Assos and L3'kon of the Troad, 
he too was a Greek of Asia ; his native place was Pitane. 
He was obviously of considerable parts and really witty, and 
^„. heonade the Academy again the leading school in Athens. 
As a personality he deserved his prominence. He was a 
man of real worth ; his kindly nature an'd actions, and his 
freedom from pride, were notorious ; though well off and 
living in more than comfort, he cared little for money, and 
his generosity was as lavish as unostentatious : .l^ost ready 
to do good and most loath to have it known ' is his Biogra- 
pher's verdict. There appears to have been much personal 
liking and mutual respect between him and Kleanthes, and 
each defended the other warmly on occasion,"^^ though intel- 
lectually they were at daggers drawn. 

. But if Arkesilaos raised Plato's school once more to the 
leading position in Athens, it was largely because,llhder him, 
it was no longer the school of Plato. Though Pyrrhon does 
not appear to have been one of his numerous teachers, his 
contemporaries treated him as a Pyrrhonist ; ^*' and the 

''^ Diog. L. 5, 65. 63 J Q ii_ 334 ^ syiip. 232. 

" Arkesilaos: Life in Diog. L., bk. 4, and two stories Athen. 10, 420c; 
Wilamovvitz, Atitigottos, p. 70 seq. ; Susemihl i, 122 ; von Arnim, Arkesi/aos 
\n P. IV.; Zeller, Stoics, &c. (Eng. tr.), p. 529. — There is an obvious ele- 
ment of slander in Diogenes' Life, which Hense {Teles-, p. Ixv) has ascribed 
to the same source as the same element in the life of Bion. 

65 Diog. L. 7, 171, Kleanthes; Plut. Mor. 55c, Arkesilaos (see Kaibel, 
' Baton ' in P. W.). 

^'^ So Ariston (see n. 63) and Timon [Si/loi, frs. 31 and 32, Diels = 16 and 
17, Wachsmuth). 


burden of his teaching was purely scept ical. He may have 
thought that he was going back to Socrates ; '"' he can hardly 
have thought that he was going back to Plato. The question 
has been warmly argued both in ancient and in modern times ; 
and while some in antiquity defended him as a Platonist on 
the absurd ground that his scepticism was merel}^ a touch- 
stone for pupils, and that to those chosen he then taught 
esoteric Platonism,^- a modern writer has taken up an exactly 
opposite standpoint ; his ai m was the search for truth, and he 
sought it as Plato di^.^^ But it must be remembered that 
whereas Plato certain positive.conclusions, Arkesilaos 
^came to none ; he desired, as did every philosopher, to find 
truth, but he decided that truth could not be found, and that 
one must suspend one's judgement. The comparative ease 
with which Llitr sceptical p0Silion~~could be maintained, the 
assimilation of the little non-Athenian schools, and the fact 
that Arkesilaos was a persuasive lecturer and the ablest mind 
in Athens, inevitably raised him and his school to the highest 
position ; not, however, without strong opposition, notably from 
Timon and Ariston and Antagoras the poet. These men were 
equally bitter against him, but on different grounds ; Timon as 
the legitimate successor of Pyrrhon, on whose preserves Arke- 
silaos (he thought) was poaching ; Antagoras as the friend of 
the true Platonists Polemon and Krates, from whose teaching 
Arkesilaos had departed; Ariston as the champion of the Stoic 
theory of knowledge, which Arkesilaos was especially attack- 
ing ; in fact Arkesilaos and his greater successor, Karneades, 
were_t o damage that theory past any mending, a niatterj tvhirh nf. 
course did not in the least impair the vital paTTofStoicism^^he 
philosoph}' of conduct. So Antagoras abused Arkesilaos in the 
market-place ; "^^ Ariston's friends brought up against him the 

" See Susemihl i, 123, n. 585 ; cf. Cic. Aurtf. i, 44. 

^* Sext. Pyrrh. i, 234, 'some say.' 

*' Von Amim in /\ IV. s.v. Ajkesilaos ; he says that his aim was the 
knowledge of truth (Cic. Acad. 2, 60), and that the sources which attribute 
to him the impossibihty of knowledge are wrong. Unfortunately one of these 
sources is precisely Cic. ylcad. I, 44 ; and if Cicero's Academics are evidence 
in the one case they would seem to be so in the other. The Plato to whom 
von Amim thinks Arkesilaos went back is the early Plato ; Helleiiistische 
Phiiosopliie, p. 250 (in Die Kultur der Gegenwart, I, 5). 

«« Ael. V.H. 14, 26. 

334 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

time-honoured charge that he 'corrupted the young ';''•' Timon 
lampooned him as an owl courting the popularity of a mob 
of chaffinches, whose admiration stamped him as a trifler, and 
inquired of him, not without point, why he opened his mouth so 
wide as to call himself a Platonist;^- while Ariston himself, with 
insult still more pointed, turned him into a kind of chimaera, 
whose face might be the face of Plato, but whose body and tail 
were Diodoros the dialectician and Pyrrhon the sceptic."^ The 
actual result was probabl}'' to strengthen Arkesilaos' position. 
Poli tically.|aos in public maintained a strict neu - 
trality. He had been an intimate friend of Hierokles, Anti- 
gonos general in the Piraeus, a circumstance which led to some 
feeling against him, for Hierokles, naturall}-, cannot have ii££n 
popular; but. he never courted the friendship of Antigonos, 
and indeed went out of his way to avoidii. It was not very 
easy for the friend of Hierokles never to meet Antigonos ; 
but Arkesilaos kept his independence manfully, and the only 
favour he ever sought from Antigonos was something for 
his native city of Pitane, which seems not to have been in 

4 Antigonos' power to grant. His most d irect connexiiia with 
the Macedonian house was not with Antigonos at all, but with 
Demetrios the Fair, who before the Chremonidean war had 
been in Athens for a time as Arkesilaos' pupil. ^^ But in this 
matter at least Arkesilaos was a true follower of Plato. The 
Academy had always been the home of quiet but well-under- 
stood patriotism : Arkesilaos went further. For among his 
pupils were those two men from Megalopolis,*^^ who were to 
achieve an almost legendary renown as liberators, not only of 
their own city, but of any city which called on them and whose 

" Diog. L. 4, 40. 

^^ Timon, fr. 34 (19) = Diog. L. 4, 42, t\ TrXarvveai (why do you 'spread 
yourself so, open your mouth so wide?) was ingeniously conjectured by 
Wilamowitz {Andgonos, p. 76) to mean ' weshalb bleibst du Platoniker?' 
Neither Wachsmuth nor Diels has adopted this ; but in view of Timon's 
other play on Plato's name (TrXaricrraKos, Plato-fish ; see ch. 8, n. 72), and the 
traditional derivation of Plato from TrXarvs (Neanthes, fr. 13, in F.H. G. iii, 
p. 5), it seems to me very probable. 

^^ Diog. L. 4i 33» T^fiocrQe nXarwi', omdev Ilvppaiv, fxeacros AioSapos. 

** All this from Diogenes. On the request for Pitane see Ferguson, Athens, 
p. 234, n. 3. 

^^ For Ekdemos and Demophanes see Polyb. 10, 22, 2 ; Plut. Philop. I ; 
Paus. 8, 49, 2; ch. 12, p. 357. 


freedom required championing. In the darkest hours of 
Macedoniatmite;'ArkesiIaos' class-room was one of the places 
in which still glowed the spark of libert}^, waiting to burst 
into flame. Well may the Athenians have set him above all 
his contemporaries.'^'' 

Theji£iv_ position of things must have made a sensible dif- 
ference in Antigonos' relations with the world of philosophy 
In truth, they were hardly what they had been. The leading 
philosopher in Athens was now one who was quite detached 
from Antigonos, and belonged to a school that had never had 
any welcome for Macedonian kings ; and, over and above this, 
Arkesilaos, as was not unnatural in a native of Pitane, stood in 
the friendliest relationship to Eumenes of Pergamon, wTfh 
whom he perhaps corresponded ;'''^ and Eumenes was a friend 
of Egypt. The Stoa had deserted Macedonia for Egypt and 
Sparta. The newly-acquired friendship of the Colonnade was 
perhaps hardly a set-off to this. So much of our knowledge 
rests on a tradition which is vividly anti-Macedonian that it 
is always possible that Lykon and Hieronymos of Rhodes 
have had hard measure dealt out to them precisely because 
they were Antigonos' friends ; but, even so, they cannot be 
made out to be very notable personalities. And Lykon, though 
he had changed the traditional attitude of his school, was any- 
thing but a partisan of Antigonos. His real sympathies, 
natural in a Greek of the Troad, were, like those of Arkesi- 
laos, with Pergamon ; both Eumenes and Attalos I honoured 
him above all his contemporaries, an indication that there may 
have been more in Lykon than our tradition allows ; ^^ and he 
refused an invitation to go to Antiochos II, the friend of 
Antigonos and enemy of Eumenes. 

Antigonos then, when he instituted and endowed a yearly 
festival at Athens in honour of his dead son Halkyoneus, could 
find no one better to have the conduct of it than Hieronymos 
of R hodes : though it is always possible, as has been suggested, 
that Hieronymos was chosen because of some special friend- 
ship for the deceased. But although so many of the philoso- 
phers now looked away from Antigonos and toward Egypt 

''•' DlOg. L. 4, 44, UTToB()(6(\s nitp 'AdrjPiiluit' cor ovSei's. 
'' lb. 4, 38. '' lb. 5, 67. 

336 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

j and her friends, it is perhaps characteristic of the Athens o f 
I this time that none of them went ver}^ far in the matter ; all, 
save Lykon, were ready to attend, and did attend, the 3'early" 
festival given by Hieronymos with Antigonos' money: even 
Arkesilaos was found there, and Lykon's absence was due 
] solely to personal dislike of Hieronymos ; one of the things, 
no doubt, which prevented him, the only scholarch at all so 
disposed, from drawing closer to the king of Macedonia.''^ 

Over and above this, we cannot but come to the conclusion 
that what was taking place in the schools was also taking place 
in the world, and that Antigonos' conquest of Athens, unavoid- 
able as it was on Antigonos' part, had brought about an 
equally unavoidable change in his relationship with the city. 
TITe government, of course, after the withdrawal of the 
Mouseion garrison, was carried on by the pro-Macedonian 
party, and entirely in Antigonos' interest ; it could not be 
otherwise. But though Athens again offers her official sacri- 
fices for the king's welfare, and even engages in a war on his 
behalf, we feel that the times are changed, and that it is now 
the goodwill, no longer of a friend, but of a dependant.''^ 

There is one other event which falls at this time, as to 
which we would gladl}'' know something. From the point of 
view of world-history, it can hardly be denied that one dis- 
tinguishing peculiarity of the third century before Christ was 
^is, that so many of its greatest men were Asiatics. In the 
earlier part of the century it had been Zeno, the Phoenician 
of Kition; at its end it was to be Hannibal, the Phoenician of 
Carthage. In the time between the two falls the reign of 
Asoka of Pataliputra, king of all India north of the Deccan. 
Any estimate of Asoka must of course always be based on what 
he himself says about him.self ; but there is no more reason to 
suppose it untrue, seeing the frankness with which he relates 
the horrors of war once inflicted by himself on the Kalingas, 
than there is reason to doubt the main fact of his life, that he 

^^ Diog. L. 4,41 and 42; 5, 68.— The suggestion that Hieronymos may 
have been a friend of Halkyoneus' is P'erguson's [A/hens, 233). 

'" /. G. ii, I, add. vov. 373 b ; archon Lysiades (247/6, Ferguson ; ? 242/1, 
Kolbe). /. G. ii, 307 = Syll} 635 ; Kallimedes (246/5, Ferguson and Kolbe). 
/. G. ii, 374 ; year unknown, but the priestess mentioned is a daughter of 
Polyeuktos the archon of 275/4, and k«1 toO [3a<Ti\eoos 'AvTiyovov fits the gap. 



found India Brahmin and left it largel}^ Buddhist. It was 
after the conquest of the Kalingas in the ninth year of his 
reign (261), and in consequence, by his own account, of his 
remorse for the bloodshed and suffering so caused, that 
Asoka became a Buddhist la}' disciple."^ Two years later, in 
259, he formall}^ entered the Order, and dispatched mission- 
aries all over the world to effect a truer conquest, conquest 
(as he puts it) by the Law of Piety : these were sent, not only 
throughout India, but to five of the Hellenistic courts, those 
of Antiochos II, Ptolemy II, Magas of Cyrene, Alexander of 
Epeiros, and Antigonos. '^ Whether they ever arrived we do 
not know. A later Ceylonese work, which affects to know 
the names and destinations of all Asoka's missionaries, con- 
ducts them all to places in India and Ceylon, except one, 
Maharakkita, who was sent to the country of the Yonas, the 
north-west frontier tribes of that name ; '^ but the parti- 
culars given in the Mahavamsa often deserve little 
enough credit, and it omits other missions attested by the 
inscriptions.'* T here doe s not perhaps exist more than one^ 
actual indication of the presL-nce of a Buddhist in the Hellen- 
istic world.'"' But an embassy would not necessaril}' leave 
archaeological traces of itself ; and of how many other events 
of this time has all record perished ? Several Greek envo3^s 
had already gone to the court of Pataliputra ; '*' Asoka's 
father had petitioned Antiochos I for the visit of a Greek 
philosopher ; '^' in Augustus' time, when overland communi- 
cation was less easy than before the Parthian revolt, an 
Indian embassy came overland to Augustus, among their 

" The dates, and the translations of the inscriptions used, are those given 
in the second edition of V. A. Smith's Aso/ca (1909). 

" Kock Elite t 13. 

" V. A. Smith, of), c, p. 44. — I discussed these Yonas,/. //. S. xxii, 286. 
— Bactria had not yet revolted from Antiochos II. 

'* The Mahavamsa omits the missions to the Tamil kingdoms of South 
India, which are attested by the inscriptions, and includes a mission to Pegu, 
which is not. V. A. Smith, Early History of India, p. 166 ; Asoka ^, p. 44. 

" A Ptolemaic gravestone, with the Buddhist wheel and trisula, found by 
Prof. Flinders Petrie ; /. A". A. S. 1898, p. 875. 

"* Megasthcnes from Seleukos I to Chandra-gupta. Daimachos from 
Seleukos or Antiochos I to his son Bindusara, .Asoka's father ; Strab. 2, 70. 
Dionysios from Ptolemy II to one of the dynasty, Plin. A'. //. 6. 17. 

" Bindusara to Antiochos I ; Hegesand. ap. .Vthen. 14, 652 f. 

147S Z 

338 THE LOST YEARS chap. 

number being tliat famous ascetic, whether a follower of 
Buddha or Brahma, who burnt himself alive in the market- 
place at Athens as a demonstration of his creed. ""^ With these 
things before us, nothing hinders us from taking Asoka's state- 
ment to be literally true. 

We may picture for ourselves, if we please, the visit of that 
missionary to the court of Pella, dressed in the yellow robe of 
his Order, with shaven head and begging-bowl, undistin- 
guished save for the king's envoys that escorted him, undis- 
tinguished perhaps even b}' any escort at all, bu t represeniative 
A of a faith that was to embrace one-third of the humanj;a£e, 
/ land oTiTBelief, as 3^1Inc'orrup'ted, in 'one who" had found for 
\llTis yufferfng fellow-mortals the path of peace. Much of what 
Tie had to sa}' would go home to his audience. Antigonos 
must have had some fellow-feeling for a king who took his_ 
kffigship seriousl}', whose time and work were his people's.'^ 
The statesmen of the court would listen, perhaps with interest,' 
to the account of a monarch who planted trees and dug wells 
along his roadwa3's, built rest-houses and founded hospitals ; 
who said that slaves must be treated properly and every 
living creature with respect, and who professed to know a 
better way of conquest than that of the sword.'^" The philo- 
sophers of the court might compare their own ideals with the 
Indian's law of piety ,^^ while they listened to the story of an 
alien philosoph}' which had actuall3^put into practice that which 
some of themselves had attempted, a philosophy whose 
followers, by abjuring the world and the things of the world, 
had thrown off with all their possessions the troubles that 
even the smallest possessions bring, and had b}' contempla- 
tion attained, not only to that present tranquillity of spirit at 

'* Nicholas Damasc. ap. Strab. 15, 719, 720. " Rock Edict 6. 

^" Rock Edicts 2, II, 13 ; Minor Rock Edict 2 ; Pillar Edict 7, 
*' Asoka's ' Law of Piety ' enjoins : [R. E. 3) obedience to father and 
mother ; liberality to friends, acquaintances, relatives, Brahmins, and ascetics ; 
respect for the sacredness of life, small expense and small accumulation ; 
{R. E. 11) proper treatment of slaves and servants ; {Minor R. E. 3) reverence 
for teachers and speaking the truth ; and generally {Pillar Edict 7 ; cf. P. E. 
2), compassion, liberality, truth, purity, gentleness, and saintliness. On the 
Buddhist colouring of this see Asoka-, 30-2. It is interesting, therefore, to 
compare it with bed-rock Greek morality of about the same period, for instance 
[Plutarch] dc Lib. Educ. 7 E, a passage perhaps strongly influenced by Bion 
(Susemihl i, 41, n. 117 b). 


which some of the Greeks were ahning, but (as the}' beUeved) 
to a path of enhghtenment which would at last lead them forth 
free of the confused turmoil of living and being, in a freedom 
with which the Stoic's assumed liberty to usher himself forth 
from this life could not for a moment compare. It ma}- even 
be that among the philosophers some one, in the spirit of Epi- 
ctetus, would not have averted his head at the saying that 
wrongs must be borne patiently if it be possible ;*- though all 
alike, king, statesmen, philosophers, would have been equally 
at a loss to understand how the master of India could think 
that nothing bore much fruit save only that which concerned 
the other world.*^'' It is perhaps but a fancy; but it may 
please us to think that for a moment there was in truth some 
sort of communication between the king who declared himself 
the servant of his people and the king whose ideal of king- 
ship was expressed in his master's words, ' All men are my 
children.' ^* 

^^ R. E. 13, and the Kalinga Borderers' Edict. ^^ R. E. 13. 

** Twice repeated, in the Borderers' and the Provincials' Edicts. It is a 
slight variant of a phrase attributed to Gautama Buddha. 

Z 2 



With the conclusion of the peace of 255 it looked as though 
all danger of any further Egyptian aggression had passed 
away with the passing of the reason for that aggression. 
But this is not to say that all questions at issue between 
Egypt and Macedonia had been removed. Rather, with the 
elimination of Athens and Epeiros and the temporary eclipse 
/|of Sparta, the two great Powers were left face to face without 
any buffer state intervening, and the radical cause of differ- 
ence between them came more plainly into sight. Egypt had 
-suffered loss on the coasts of Asia at Antiochos' hands ; but 
her naval supremacy had not yet been questioned. She still 
controlled the sea, and was still master of the League of the 
Islanders ; the Aegean was still an Egyptian lake. But the 
League had been founded by Antigonos' grandfather, and 
Antigonos' father had for twenty years borne rule at sea as 
absolute and unquestioned as that of Ptolemy ; and with all 
. matters settled on the mainland, it was inevitable that Anti- 
/ _^onos' thoughts should at last turn to the re-conquest, as a 
/ practical matter, of what any son of Demetrios must have 
; , regarded as not the least part of his legitimate heritage. 
^ I Many reasons combined' to urge this on his attention. It 
^ is not necessary to suppose that vengeance for the death of 
his half-brother in Cyrene was one of them ; for, strictly 
speaking, Ptolemy had no responsibility for that death at all. 
Doubtless a desire to repay Ptolemy for the endless wars 
which the latter had inflicted on Macedonia counted for some- 
thing. But two other reasons can be seen which, in the 
nature of things, must have played a part in reinforcing what, 
after all, was the sufficient compelling motive, the desire to 
recover what had belonged to Demetrios. 


Macedonia had, throughout Antigonos' reign, been at a 
disadvan tag e in one respect compar ed with the other two 
chief P o\vei-s in the north of the peninsula. While Epeiros 
comprised Dodona and Aetolia controlled Delphi, Macedonia /f^ ^ 
possessed jLQ great reli gious cen tre recognized as such by**^ n ^ 

_the Greek rac e. For sT rower that desired definitely to be ^ 
well within the circle of Greek c ulture, a certain disadvantage 
may have been felt here. The control of Delos would do /s 
mor e for Macedonia than symbolize the rule of the sea ; i t 'y^jjj 
would definitely bring within her sphere one of the very 
greatest of the religious centres of the Greek race, precisely 
as the control of Athens supplied her with her intellectual 
capital. But while the spiritual life of the Athenian schools, 
whatever it might mean to the court circle, can have meant 
nothing to the plain Emathian farmer, even the plainest 
could understand Delos and the worship of the Delian 

But the other reason was weightici- and more practical than 
this. Egypt controlled the whole of the Eastern Mediter? 
ranean , absolutely and" without question, so far as galle3's 
could do It. Tt is not possible but that Macedonia had a 
sense of being hedged m. The "Egy ptian "S'^^o wer may of 
course have counted for something in the sphere of trading; 
undoubtedly the sea-command was of use in diverting the 
wealth and commerce of the world into the channels that led, 
to Alexandria.^ But more important than any question of 
trade mu>l h:i\r Ixt-n the land-power's feeling that she was 
ringed m, gripped on all sides b}" the sea-power's tentacles. 

"Like the wrestler who has drawn a bye, and stands watching 
ready to encounter the wearied victor in the contest, so the 
sea-power watched her rival, ready and able to take advantage 
of each and every embarrassment.- Even Jlorinth _ iiSidL 
was under observation ; from the all buTTsIand of Methana, 
tITe naval base m tne Argolid which Eg3'pt had seized some 
time in the late wars and aptly re-named Arsinoe,' a fleet 

' Wilamowitz, Antigonos, 221-2. I know of no evidence for Holm's 
statement (vol. iv, Eng. tr., pp. 197, 209) that Egypt protected freedom of 
trade in the North Aegean. 

- Polyb. 5, 34, 8, ('(prjSpevov. 3 jjgg (.j^ [Q^ j^ ^-_ 


c ould watc h Corinth and the Piraeus, and flank any Antigonid 
fleet based on Corinth. 

The pohtical positio n, then, being what it was, it is no 
wonder that Antigonos used the opportunity of the peace to 
create a new naNy. In one way it was a fair enough venture. 
More than twenty 3'ears had passed since the Celtic invasion, 
and a new generation of 3'oung men in Macedonia had come 
to military age. If Patroklos' challenge still rankled in 
Antigonos' mind, Patroklos had also exposed the essential 
weakness of an Eg}- ptian fleet ; it was manned by Eg3'ptian5. 
And meanwhile the world had seen a new thing, A great 
land-power, by the adoption of a few simple expedients, had 
taken to the water with instantaneous and overwhehmng 
success ; and to Antigonos the victories which Rome was 

IwTnning over Carthage must have been full of promise. He 
was better off than Rome for the necessary trained men, 
masters and steersmen ; and, given a boarding fight, it was 
extremely doubtful whether any marines that Egypt could 
raise would stand against Macedonian troops. Egypt's actual 
effective force of men of Greek or Macedonian blood settled 
in Egypt was none too great, and was her ultimate sheet- 
anchor ; she could hardly risk such on shipboard, where few 
states emplo3'ed their best troops. And Rome had done 
more than show how a boarding fight could be secured. 
Whatever form of grappling is implied by the corvus, Rome 
had learnt the system from Sicil}^;'* and the connexion 
between Corinth and S3Tacuse, in shipbuilding as in other 
matters, was still close. ^ Whether the actual Roman device 
may not have been really Syracusan or Corinthian in origin 
is immaterial ; for both Corinth and her daup; -hter rifry harl 
always possessed a traditional method of sea-fighting which 
depended on ships rather more heavily built than .the,] igliL 
triremes of Athens and Phoenicia^ It is certain that what 
Rome was doing would be well known in Corinth, and that 
the lesson of her victories lay at Antigonos' service. 
— Still, whatever the shortcomings of an Egj^ptian fleet ^as 

* Polyb. 1,21 and 22. 

^ The builder of Hieron's ship, Archias, came from Corinth ; Athen. S, 
206 f. 


regards manning, the sea-power of Eg^pt was, to all appear- ^ 
ance, very great ; and the fact that tradition has exaggerated ' 
it out of all reason must not blind us to its real greatness. ; ^^ 
~Kt some time or other in the reign of Philadelphos— doubtless 
toward its very end— the official Eg^'ptian navy list seems to 
have recorded a grand total of at least 300 warships.'' Athens 
indeed had possessed as many or more in her time, perhaps 
Syracuse also ; bu L even so. Egypt was, in numbers, as 
st rong on paper as Demetrios had ever been, a little stronger 
than contemporaiy Rpine, half as strong again as contem- 
porary Carthage." But these comparisons are merely keel 
for keel ; and mere comparison of numbers is here mislead- 
ing. For the size of warships had steadil}^ tended to grow ; 
and in the Egyptian navy even the quinquereme had gSfiJL^ 
place to larger vessels. Two-thirds of the fleet, it is true, 
"Consisted of quadriremes and smaller vessels, doubtless 
principally of smaller vessels ; but th e strength of the navy 
was thought to consist in the great number of huge galleys of 
"seven, nine, and even more men to the oar, of the type 
"brought into favour, with such startling success, by Deme- 
frios at Salamis. It is even possible that we may have to 
Teckon witli tlie Egyptian ships of the end of Philadelpho's' 
reign averaging the power of a quinquereme, a higher 
average than ever obtained at Rome or Carthage, a much 
higher average than that of the fleets which met at Salamis in 
306, and an average, of course, out of all proportion to that of 
the Athenian navy of the time of Demosthenes. Moreover, ,- ,. 
th £ fleet en joyed the very real, nay vital, advantage of opera-_b.' .- 
^ng in a sea studded with Egyptian bases and military posts, \ 
enabling easy movement in any desired direction. 
^ Still, there were other weak spots beside the manning. 
The number of Egyptian interests would almost certainly, in K 
the e\ent of a great war, entail the dividing, perhaps the sub- 1 ^\ 1 
divid Jiu'. of the fleet ; it could hardl}^ operate as a whole. It . -^""^-^ 
is quite [MissibU', c\'en, that the fleet could not be manned as 
a whole, in spite of Egypt's large population and her naval 

® See App. 10, p. 456. 

■^ Vox Demetrios see ch. 5. Rome and Carthage, refs. ch. 3, n. 47. 


conscription ; ^ for the number of rowers required must have 
been enormous, even allowing for the fact that some of the 
best contingents came from, and were manned by, men of 
Phoenicia and Cyprus." And, above all, it was a naval service 
that had never won a great victory. What it held, had come 
'to it by default ; and its record, when it had met the Antigonid," 
i was a record of defeat. 

^ntigonos had no chance of creating a fleet that should, on 
paper, be anywhere near a match for that of Ptolemy. The 
better part of it would have to be manned from Corinth and 
Chalkis, though both Piraeus and the large coast towns of 
Chalkidike possessed ample facilities for building, and he had 
plenty of timber. But it was useless to build a fleet that 
could not be manned ; and Gauls were no use on shipboard. 
He must of course have intended to use his Macedonians as 
marines ; he was fortunate if he did not have to use them at 
the oar also, as was done by his grandson. ^° His chance lay 
in~~Tfiis7that, unlike Eg3^pt, he would be able to employ his 
fleet as a single unit, and would be able so to man it that, if 
he could secure the indispensable boarding fight, his victory 
would be as certain as that of the Roman fleet in similar 
ircumstances.^^ But in one way he was much less happily 
ituated than Rome. Rome understood how to use her 
enormous resources ; and in the third century Rome never 
fought at sea against odds. Antigonos had to use what 
resources he had, and to prepare deliberately for a contest in 
which he would be heavily outnumbered. For all analog}^, 
both of territorial resources and of tradition, leads to the con- 
f . elusion that if Antigonos could get to sea a fleet equivalent 
in power to about 100-120 quinqueremes he was doing very 
well indeed ; if he ever succeeded in putting in line the 
equivalent of 150 quinqueremes, or say one-half of the paper 
strength of Egypt, he was doing wonders, the possibility of 
which is not easily to be credited. ^^ 

* The conscription is not mentioned till the reign of Ptolemy V, but it may 
date from earlier. O. G.J. 90, 1. 17 ; Bouche-Leclercq, vol. iv, p. 7. 
® For ship-building in Cyprus, O.G.I. 39. '" Polyb. 5, 2, 4. 

" The genuine Macedonian still inspired terror in battle ; Polyb. 4, 69. 
'- See App. 10, pp. 457, 458. 


Of the particulars of his fleet nothing is known. Of his 
flagship alone, a most famous vessel, it has been possible 
to recover, though dimly, a number of details.^'^ It is practi- 
cally certain that she was built at Corinth, apd more than 
probable that she was named after that city, i^itigonos' chief 
naval _base. She was a tall heavy ship, with two decks 
over the heads of the rowers, so that with the deck on 
which stood the rower's thwarts she could be, and was, 
called a three-decker;''* her motive power was that of an 
enneres, nine men to an oar; j&he was probably suggested 
by, and in some sort a development of the principle of, 
Lysimachos' extraordinary okteres, which had been so 
instrumental in the defeat of Antigonos in his naval battle 
with Ptolemy Keraunos in 280. That she was fitted for a 
very heavy catapult, carried grapnels, and was perhaps 
equipped with the towers on deck so familiar in the Roman 
battles of the civil wars, is tolerably certain ; if the sources 
can be trusted, her relative weight may be guessed at from 
the fact that timber enough for something like fifteen quad- 
riremes was built into her. Xhatshe, piust have been some- 
\yhat slow, and intended to lead a fleet which meant to^fight 
at close quart ers and boa rd , if possible, and not trust to 

ijianceuvring for the ram, is obvious. Too little is known of 
third-century shipbuilding to enable any guess at what other 
developments may have taken place on these hues ; but some 
of Antony's ships at Actium may have been in a similar cate- 
gory, and the type (substituting catapults for guns) may have 
already begun to approximate to that of the mediaeval 
galleasse. One question of great interest must be answered 
in the negative. When it is remembered that the quin- 
quereme and her sisters could mount one catapult only, as 
the mediaeval quinquereme mounted one gun ; and when it is 
remembered how, at Lepanto, the power of the clumsy sail- 
ing galleon to throw a broadside ended at once and for ever 
the day of the handy oared galley as the ship of the line ; it 
is natural to ask, whether in Antigonos' ship, or in any 

" For everj'tliing connected with tliis vessel I refer to my paper in J. H. S. 
1910, p, 209, ' The Dedicated Ship of Antigonos Gonatas.' 
'* TpidpiKvos. 


1^ successor, a nj- trace is found of tl\e idea_oLa_bniadside. All 
tliat can be said is, that no such trace appears;^"' we must 

[ conclude, as is probable from other indications, that the cata- 
pult in naval warfare was comparatively ineffective 

It was obvious that to challenge at sea a Power whose 
effective naval strength was from two to three times as great 
as your own was no light matter ; and Antigonos sought 
first to lessen the risk. He looked about for alliances ; and 
drew both the two obvious bonds a good deal closer than 
they had been before. Both Antiochos and Aetolia were 
already "his friends ; with Antiochos he now formed a definite 
alliance, and it would seem that his relations with Aetolia- 
. became closer, though the subject is obscure. 
"~ Aetolia, during the years,. that had elapsed since Pyrrh os' 
death, had made good use of the free hand which Antigonos 
permitted her. She had_been expanding her League as 
opportunity offered, in part no doubt peacefully, in part 
aggressivel}' ; and she had steadily grown in power. Of the 
little Amphikt^^onic peoples, the Ainianes, the Dorians of the 
mother-cit}^, the Dolopes, and the Malians, had joined the 
Aetolian League ; ^^' their votes helped to swell the Aetolian 
vote on the Amphiktyonic council. More important was the 
acquisition of part of Phokis, and of Eastern Lokris. For a 
short time after Pyrrhos' death Phokis appears to have three 
votes on the council ; somewhere about the epoch of the 
Chremonidean war her votes seem to vanish altogether, and 
from about the time of the peace of 255 she reappears with 
one vote.^' It is known that at a date somewhere before 261, 
and perhaps not ver}^ long before, Phokis was engaged in 
war with some state and very doubtful of the issue ; ^* and 
the natural reading of the above facts is, that Phokis com-' 

'^ Had it ever been thought of, it must have appeared in Hieron's ship 
(Athen. 5, 206 e) or in the T€crcr€paKotTt]pr]s (ib. 5, 203 e) ; but the former only 
carried the usual one catapult, extra large, and the armament of the latter is 
not given. 

'" Beloch 3, 2, 344. ^^ See the table, ib. p. 350. 

^* /. G. ix, I, 97. It is dated approximately by this, that it is a response to 
an invitation of the Tenians to declare the island and temple of Poseidon 
aavXa, and the temple was built between 278 and 261 ; it is mentioned by 
Philochoros. (Graindor, in Must'e Beige, 191 1, p. 254, thinks he will be able 
to date the building circ. 270/69.) 


menced to extend her territor}', perhaps at the expense of 
the Eastern Lokrians, and had thus taken their vote ; that the 
Lokrians had appealed to the Amphiktyones, that is in effect 
to AetoHa ; and that war had followed, ending in the absorp- 
tion by Aetolia of part of Phokis with one of the Phokian votes, 
while Eastern Lokris or part of it, with its vote (which does 
not appear again), had joined the Aetolian League. 

Aetolia had thus gained a large increase of territory, and 
no}v^controlle"crhiiTF7tnfIp1ifkrfohrc votes. Should Antigohos 
ever alter his mind about his relationship to the Amphikt3^ony, 
Aetolia could now outvote him by herself. But with the new 
consciousness of power came the beginnings of its abuse. 
Luxury -began to grow upon the Aetolians in a manner that 
was to~ become a byword ;^^ and with luxury came greed. 
Itlias alread}' been told how Aetolia now began to put into 
practice that well-known instrument of her polic}^ partition, 
with its cynical interpretation of Hesiod's maxim that the 
half is greater than the whole : she had already joined 
Alexander of Epeiros in partitioning Akarnania. 

So far, Aetolia had kept her pledge of neutrality to Anti- 
goiios, but no more. Indeed, she had rather gone out of her 
way to show the world that it was neutrality and not friend- 
ship ; for directly the Chremonidean war was over, she had 
caused Delphi to pay Egypt the compliment of granting to 
the whole of the citizens of Alexandria in a bod}' prior rights 
of consulting the oracle, while a little later, in 260/59, Delphi 
had passed a decree in honour of Areus II of. Sparta.'^'^ 
How and on what terms Antigonos succeeded in converting 
neutrality into friendship is not known, nor is it known 
whether, as yet, he had any definite alliance with the Aetolian 
League ; buLthi^iact from henceforth of a closer relationship, or 
entente, cannot well be doubted, in view of the course of events. 

-AfrtiociTOS''had recently concluded a favourable peace with 
Egypt ; but neither the late war, nor the peace, had touched 

'" I'olyb. 13, I ; Agatharch. ap. Athen. 12, 527 b = fr. 2 in F. //. G. 3, p. 192. 

-" Decree for the citizens of Alexandria, Syll? 488 = G. I). 1. 2592. Tiie 
archon is Aristagoras, 262/1, 15eloch. Decree for Areus W, B.C. H. 191 1, 
p. 488 (see cii. 10, n. 84) ; the archon is Emmenidas, 260/59, Beloch. The 
fact that Kcian victories at the Soteria begin in Aristagoras' year can hardly 
have a political meaning. 


Jhe r eal question at issue between the two empires, the 
question of Hollow S3'ria. No doubt Arados, though now 
autonomous, was friendly to Antiochos ; ^^ but the bulk of 
Phoenicia proper was still held by Ptolemy. ^ Egypt "had 
somet hing which. ApUQchos regarded as his, just as she had 
something which Antigonos regarded as his. A definite 
aTHance was an obvious course ; it. was cemented by the- 
ijiarriage of Antigonos' son Demetrios to a younger Strato- 
nike,-- who was a daughter of Antiochos I and the elder 
Stratonike, and full sister of Antiochos H. To represent 
the involved relationships of the two houses is becoming 
impossible : the younger Stratonike was her husband's first 
cousin and also his aunt, her mother-in-law's half-sister and 
also her niece, her father-in-law's niece, her own mother's 
granddaughter-in-law, and perhaps other things which the 
curious may work out. The date of the marriage can be fixed 
with tolerable certainty to 253 It cannot have preceded the 
peace of 255, not only because of Demetrios' age, but because 
the Egyptian fleet would have made the successful transfer 
of the bride from Antioch to Pella a precarious if not im- 
possible matter ; and any date later than 253 is of course 
quite out of the question, owing to the rupture in the rela- 
tions of the two kings. The year 253 coincides so well with 
other events that it may be definitely accepted. 
/That year saw Antiochos bus}'' preparing for the new war 


-uX., //in supporFoT Antigonos. At some time in the course of the 
3'ear lie sold a piece of territory to his wife Laodike for cash ; 
and the purchase moneys of which the first of the three in- 
stalments fell due in December 253, was to be paid into the 
war chest.^'^ This instructive occurrence, whidbLJYe__need 
not suppose to have been an isolated one, shows that Antio- 
chos was making ready for war; but it also shows that his 
resources were at a low ebb. 

-^ Strab. 16, 754 ; Beloch 3, i, 695. The era of Arados, i.e. its autonomy, 
begins in 259/8. 

^ Euseb. I, 249, Schoene; Just. 28, i, 2. See Beloch 3, 2, 93. 

^ O. G. I. 225. The money is to be paid th to Kara arpaTelav ya(o(fxv\dK[i\ov. 
The sale includes the revenues for 254/3 ; and as the dates for payment of 
the instalments of the purchase money are Dec. 253 and March and June 252, 
the sale is dated to 253. 


By the summer of 253 Antigonos' new fleet, too, was read^-.:.. 
^and at Its" head he sailed to Asia to fetch home his son's 
.bride.-'* He received her from the hands of her mother, his 
sister Stratonike, whom he had probably not seen for twenty- 
four 3'ears. 

Stratonike had had a career almost without parallel even 
[n the third century ; for her husband Seleukos had, after 
fiye years of marriage and the birth of a daughter, handed 
her over to his son Antiochos as his wife, and Antiochos' 
wife she had remained till his death, bearing him several 
children. The reasons are lost, hidden away behind the 
well-known folk-tale with which later writers adorned the 
strange event: and naturally no one troubled to record 
Stratonike's own opinions. Practically all that is known of 
her character, beside the usual Macedonian interest in litera- 
ture, is that she was devoted to religioiLand Jta the memory 
of her father Demetrios. Her numerous offerings on Delos 
are well known ; and a litde temple containing her statue 
stood in the sacred precinct there, ^ut she was not only 
a devotee of the orthodox worship of Apollo. She had been 
a friend of Arsinoe Philadelphos, and this may have led her 
into association with the more intimate creeds of Egypt ; and 
at Smyrna, where she lived, she belonged to a religious 
bod}^ or club which worshipped Anubis. She herself was 
worshipped at Sm3Tna after her death, and the local cult of 
Aphrodite afterwards bore her name.^^ 

We need then never be astonished to find Stratonike 
associated with an}- religious act, especially as regards DeTos. 
Vter offerings there can be traced from the year 279 at least; 
the earlier records having almost entirel}' perished ; and she 

'^* I find it difficult to dissociate Antigonos' appearance in the Aegean from 
the marriage, though there is no evidence. 

^^ Onihe oiKosnv^TpnToviKr] of Hypsok\es,/.G.\\, i6i, A, 1. 91, see Homolle, 
I>. C. H. 1890, p. 509, n. 3. Delian decree in praise of Teletimos who made 
a statue of Stratonike (quaere, the same statue), B. C. H. 1888, p. 419. — 
Her friendship with Arsinoe, O. G.I. 14. — Iwavov^MaTai at Smyrna, includ- 
ing 'queen Stratonike', Michel 1223; see, however, Kaerst ii, i, 275, n. 3. — 
Stratonike worshipped at Smyrna, O. Li. I. ii(), 1. 9 seq. : Aphrodite Strato- 
nikis, O. G. 1. 228 and 229, and Syll? 575. She was alive at the very end of 
the reign of Antiochos 1, O. G.I. 222.— Interest in literature, 15eloch 3, i, 
441, sufficiently explaining Lucian, TTfpl €(\. 5. Gossip of the usual kind in 
Pliny, A^. H. 35, 40. 


had marked the occasion of the marriage of her daughter 
Phila toAhtrgonos in 277 or 276 by the dedicationld Apollo^ 
of Demetrios' necklace, which she had preserved, and her 
daughter's ankle-rings. She now celebrated the marriage 
oTher daughter Stratonike with Demetrios II by supple- 
menting the gold crown of bay-leaves which adorned the 
head of the temple image of Apollo at Delos by a far more 
magnificent crown, containing four times the weight of gold 
of the old one ; and she also provided new crowns for the 
little Graces who stood on Apollo's hand. At the same time 
she dedicated another necklace to Leto.'^*^ 
. ^Stratonike had done much for Apollo ; it remained to do_^ 
/ Something for the memory of Demetrios. She possessed iuer, 
.,.xA*i"ull share of Antigonid devotion to her father. She had 
preserved his necklace after his death ; she always referred 
to herself as * daughter of Demetrios ' in her dedications ; on 
one occasion she had made use of the style of her father and 
brother and called herself ' the Macedonian '. On the base 
of the statue which she dedicated to Arsinoe, while she was 
Antiochos' wife, she does not ev'en call herself ' queen ', but 
merely * daughter of King Demetrios ', as usual. Taken in 
conjunction with the fact that not one of all her numerous 
ofKerings and de dica tions makes the least reference to Antio- 

^^ I need not consider those of Stratonike's offerings which throw no light 
on the foundation of 252. But Demetrios' necklace is important. I.G. xi, 
199, B, 1. 51 (inventory of Antigonos I, 274) ; Trtpidepain tu i^ijurjTpiov Ka\ (f>id\ia 
Kni ntpuTKeXida nvedrjKe l.TpaTovinr], acrTaTa. From this the same is restored in 
Sosimachos, 276 (/. G. xi, 164, A, 74) ; and the same TrepiBepaia, with the omis- 
sion of Stratonike's name, occur in Sosisthenes, 250 (B. C.H. 1903, p. 64 = 
/. G. xi, 287, B, 1. 21), with the variant TreptiTKiXihes 8vo. — Her dedications on 
the occasion of the marriage of her daughter Stratonike, which appear first 
in Sosisthenes, are : B. 66, a gold crown for the uyaXfjia (b. 66 gives side by 
side the t7uo crowns for the ayaXna, first the old one weighing this year 144 
drachmai, HAAAA^t^^j, which is the one of Hypsokles B, 1. 95, where it weighs 
146 drachmai — twenty-nine years' attrition in the interval, — and then the new 
one, given by Stratonike, weighing over 600 drachmai ; thus conclusively 
preventing the identification of the two, which was made by HomoUe, 
B.C.H. 1 891, p. 146); three gold crowns for the Graces, ib. B, 67; ib., a 
golden K(ideTi]i>, necklace, of forty-eight links, dedicated to Leto. This neck- 
lace, which is not, I think, found earlier, occurs again in Akridion, 240 (/. G. 
xi, 298, A, 1. 145), and in Demares, 6j///.^ 588, 1. 4, and cannot be identical 
with Demetrios' necklace, as do//i come in Sosisthenes. — The items in this 
and the next note from inventories at the time unpublished I owe to the 
kindness of Prof. Dijrrbach. 



chos, and p^niPmhpri ng th a t i AnU Qf. ! ;\ j ;^i ? ha d put hei 
son to death, it is difficult to ayoid the supposition that , 
"^tratonike considered herself rather as the daughter of her 
father than as the wife of her husband.-" It has jn important 
bearing on what follows. J^ "^"' 

For Antigonos had not put to sea merely to celebrate a 
wedding. On his way back he sailed to Delos, and there, in 
the centre of Ptolemy's sea-power, he founded two festivals 
itTtr ouou r ofthe DelraiT Ap6lT6 'afrd^flTg^odsTrf Delos, "vase 
foundations of the usual type. One series of vases bore his 
own name (Antigoneia) ; the other the name of his sister 

" In Sosisthenes, B, 66 (see n. 26), and Demares, 11. 33, 185, 198, we have 
six eiriypncf)ai on Stratonike's dedications quoted verbatim ; all are in the 
form [iaa-tXia-cra 'S.TpaTov'iKri /3ao-iXews- Arju-tiTpiov, with or without the addition of 
Kai f^aa-iXicra-T]! *iXnf. Those in Sosisthenes probably belong to 253. The 
three offerings in Demares above mentioned do not occur elsewhere, and 
might belong to Antiochos' lifetime as well as later. Earlier inventories than 
Sosisthenes seem to give no f'niypacpai of Stratonike, and there is no need to 
emphasize the fact that we cannot rely on the wording of these lists when 
they are not quoting verbatim. The consequence is that we cannot say /or 
certain what Stratonike called herself in her dedications during her husband's 
lifetime. — The strange ^TpnTovUijs MoKeVar of 274 B.C. (/. G. xi, 199, B, 1. 71, 
Antigonos 1) may be correctly preserved ; and as this otfering is in the 
TTcoptfoj oIkos, which replaced the xa^i^oBrjKrj after 279 (Homolle, B. C. H. 1882, 
p. 87), it is dated to a time when she was Antiochos' wife. — Elsewhere we 
have iTpaTovtKrjs ttjs A[r]fi]rjTpiov {Amer. J. Arch. 1910, p. 415) on a marble 
ball at Sardis ; and 2. ^aaiXfws Arjfxrjrpiov [O. G. I. 14) on the base of Arsinoe's 
statue erected by Stratonike. This last is striking. At its date, Berenike 
was jSaaiXicro-a. But at some unknown date after the recovery of Cyprus by 
Ptolemy in 294 Berenike was not yet ^aaiXia-a-a, O. G. /. 20. Therefore the 
earliest date for O. G. I. 14 is 293 (Dittenberger puts it too early), and the 
latest, Arsinoe's death in 270 ; and the point is that Stratonike does not call 
herself ^acriXia-aa or mention Antiochos, though she was at the time his wife. 
— Dittenberger already noticed it as strange, that Stratonike never refers to 
Antiochos (note 2 to Sy//.'^ 588) ; and with so many inscriptions known, it 
cannot be chance. For a queen's normal reference to her husband in the 
earlier part of the third century see e.g. O. G. I. 15 (Arsinoe) ; Hypsokles, B, 

I. 52, Berenike's offering vixip nroXf/io/ou. — There is, however, a later case to 
the contrary ; see A. Wilhelm, B.Ph. \V. 1912, 314, who fills up the frag- 
ment of a third-century Delian inventory {B. C.H. 191 1, p. 259, no. 51, 1. 10) 
as (iXXr; (i. e. (f>iA\n) fiaa-iXlaarji [<tdi]tii t^s ' \Xt^av8pov ; and it is fair to state 
that Wilhelm thinks the omission of the husband normal, quoting Stratonike 
and the (later) ^iXn jSao-iXecoj e<o8w/)ov of Demares {Syll? 588, 1. 184, cf. 

II. 13 and 213). But nothing shows that this I'hila was married, and her 
dedication to Artemis may be against it ; nor can we really say that Phthia 
was married either at the time. In Egypt the unmarried princesses bore the 
title fiii(TlXi(T<ja, O.G./. 35 ; probably also in Syria, O.G.I. 745 ; the same 
may have been the case in the Epeirot royal house, closely allied to the 
Egyptian through Berenike. And as to offerings later than the middle of 
the third century, Stratonike's very numerous dedications may have set a 


Siratonike (Stratonikcia). It is stated, as we should expect, 
that the latter foundation was made in fact b}'' Antigonos on 
Stratonike's behalf. The first vases of each foundation appear 
under the archon Phanos in 252, rendering the year 253 the 
most probable year for the actual foundation. ^^ 

If any political event, any otherwise unknown victory, had 
leoAnTTgonos to make this foundation, the inclusion of 
Stratonike would be incomprehensible. She no Ioniser played 
a part in the world's politics; she was merely queen-mother 
in Syria ; any joint action of Antigonos and Antiochos, any- 
thing bearing on Syrian policy, would have been expressed 
very differentl3^ At the same time, had Stratonike's founda- 
tion been, as so many of her dedications were, of religious 
import only, a mere offering to Apollo, the association of 
Aotigonos in it would be equall}' incomprehensillle. IPeace 
or no peace, it was well understood that Ptolemy was his 
enemy ; and to make a merely religious foundation in the 
very centre of Ptolemy's empire of the sea was an impossi- 
bility; no graver insult to Eg3^pt could be imagined. No 
Macedonian had appeared at Delos for many a long year ; 
and though there was nothing to prevent an}^ private person 
making his offenng during the religious truce, the fact that 
a Macedonian king, at the head of his fleet, should appear 
at Delos and make there a foundation to endure for all time 
neant one of two things only, a triumph or a challenge. 

It was in fact a challenge. Antigonos was weary of being 
attacked ; this time he meant to be the aggressor, and end it. 
The only bond between himself and Stratonike and Delos 

^' These two foundations have long been known. See Homolle, Archi7'es, 
53, 59, 60; and the very clear list of all the known foundations given by 
Schulhof, B. C.H. 1908, p. 97 seq. The two series of vases come out quite 
clearly in the inventories of Sosisthenes (250), B, 11. 124, 125 ; Akridion (240), 
A, 11. 83, 88 (for refs. see n. 26) ; Boulon (234), /. G. xi, 313, 11. 66, 69; and 
Menethales (229), I.G. xi, 320, B, 11. 30, 34. Akridion combined with Sosi- 
sthenes and Boulon shows that the actual fmypacfiai were as follows : on the 
vases of the Antigoneia, Ar)\ia8(s ^opfia 'ArroXXwrt 'ApW/xtSt Atjto'i ini86vTos 
^a(ri\f(i>s 'AvTiyovov eV* opxovros (tov Sflva), and on those of the Stratonikeia, 
ArjXiadfS ;^opem 'AttoXXcoci 'Apre/ii'^* Arjrot vnep (iiKTiXiaarji ^TpaTOv'iKrjs in ap^ov- 
Tos (tov 8flva) ; that is to say, the latter foundation was not made by Strato- 
nike, but by Antigonos on her behalf. It is clear that the Stratonike in 
question was Antigonos' sister ; he could not possibly have made an offering 
on behalf of the young Stratonike while entirely omitting her husband, his 
son the crown prince Demelrios. 



(religion and Seleukid politics being alike put out of the 
question) was simply this, that both he and Stratonike were 
children of Demetrios, sometime lord of Delos and the 
Aegean ; and this is the explanation of his action. There 
were still 'man}' alive who remembered the last occasion on 
which Macedonian keels had furrowed the waters of the- 
Eg3'ptian lake ; thirty years had passed since Antigonos and 
his warships had brought home Demetrios' ashes. Now, at 
t ^e head of a new fleet, Antigonos once more recalled his 
fathers memory; .he japnounced plainly, t6 Pt^l^ttiy and the ' 
world, that the son of Demetrios claimed, and was ready to 
fight for, his father's heritage. Delos had been the centre' 
of Demetrios' rule of the sea, as it was now the centre of 
that of Ptolemy ;^nd from E)elos An tigonos dictated what 
was virtually his declaration of war. Whether for tITe'time 
being he took actual possession of Delos or not is a question 
entirely immaterial. Antigonos knew perfectly, as every one 
must have known, tliarilti Luuld nut assume Lu acras lor^i 
of Delos till he had defeated Ptolemy's fleet. It was enough 
that he had issued a challenge which no great Power could 
overlook ; Ptolemy's fleet must meet him in due time.-' 

But the appearance of Antigonos in the Aegean, when the •k^^ 
reason was understood, created something lilce^'^parriitT^ttreT-e. \y^j2^ 
It was known that he was now good friends with Aetolia; *^i^ ^j2^V» 
where he went, the dreaded Aetolian corsair might follow. 
Perhaps Egypt was not as strong as her,dependants hop6d, 
or feared ; she had come badly out of the last war ; did the 
new turn of events mean that Egypt might no longer be able 
to defend them ? Kos, Ptolemy's own birth-place, began to 
send m.cssengers over half the world to get her great temple 
of Asklepios recognized as inviolable ; "" and her invitation 

^' Antigonos also dedicated a gold crown at Delos about this time, Sosi- 
sthenes, B, 1. 63. It is C07iceivable that he fought a battle of some kind with 
the Egyptian cruisers, and took temporary possession of Delos ; but, if so, 
this was not the battle of Kos, i.e. the decisive battle after which he dedi- 
cated his flagship ; and there was no question of an attempted transfer to 
him of the suzerainty of the League of the Islanders (as suggested by Fer- 
guson, Athens, p. 190). 

^" A number of responses to the Koan invitation were found by R. Herzog, 
and will be published in the Kos volume of /. G . See meanwhile Atlt. Mitt. 
1905, p. 173; Arch. Anz. 1903, pp. 9, 10. Herzog dates it 'about 250'; 
Arch. Anz. 1905, p. 11. 

H75 A a 


to Pella laid the greatest stress (as was only natural in the 
crrcu mstancesj DTittTegODdwill she felt toward TTing Anligonos 
and the Macedonians.''^ Apollo of Delos went straighter to 
THeT point; Ji£„pi:ay^d assistance from Apollo of Delphi; 
Aetolia could not decently support one sanctuary and sack 
the other. The Aetolians acted with correctness ; they 
passed a decree guaranteeing to Delos safety from all cor- 
sairs of Aetolia or her League ; a prominent citizen of Aetolia, 
Nikolaos son of Hagias, an elderly man already known at 
Delos, bore the decree to the island, and offered there to 
Apollo a valuable ring and a sum of money for a perpetual 
foundation of the usual t3'pe, known as the Nikolaeia. The 
grateful Delians voted a statue to Nikolaos ; and in the 
Delian accounts for the year 250 can be seen an entry showing 
the sum paid to one Neogenes, a stone-cutter, for engraving 
on a stele the Aetolian guarantee.^- The larger world outside 
the Aegean must have watched with great interest to see 
Iwhat Ptolemy would do. To most men living, the Egyptian 
(' 'rule of the sea must have seemed one of the root facts of 
civilization ; it had been undisturbed for thirty-four years. 
■ The old voluptuary of Alexandria took up Antigonos' 
challenge after his own fashion. He began, it is true, to 
build more great ships ; "^ but this was a precautionary 
measure only, Ln view of absolute eventualities. He did not 

^^ This appears from the unpublished response of the men of Pella ; see 
ch. 7, n. 54. Obviously such phraseology could only be used in a time of 
peace between Egypt and Macedonia. 

^- Sosisthenes A, 1. 80, payment to Neogenes for engraving to 86yna to 
AtVwXwr. A fragment of this Soyfxa is extant, running AaXi[o£]y eifiep dacfid- 
\(iav TO. [oJtt' A[tVa)]Xa)i' (cat tcoi/ 7r6[\fo>v] ; P. Roussell and J. Hatzfeld in 
i)'. C //. 1909, p. 482, no. 8, note 4. — Nikolaos ; an offering of his at Delos 
before 279 ; Hypsokles B, 1. 83. — The first vase of the Nikolaeia appears in 
251, arclion Artysileos ; Sosisthenes B, 1. 126; see Schulhof, /A C //. 1908, 
p. 106 seq. Probably therefore founded in 252. The very complete inven- 
tories of Akridion, Boulon, and Menethales (see n. 26), all list the Nikolaeia 
next after the Stratonikeia. — His ring, with a precious stone; Sosisthenes 
B, 1. 46. His statue at Delos; B. C. H. 1909, 481, no. 8. — The fniypa(f)T) 
on the vases of the Nikolaeia seems to be in the usual form (Akridion, 1. 90) ; 
ArjXindfs xo[p('t(i 'ATroWcovi 'ApTfjiibi ArjTo'i fniSovTOi NtKoAaJou AtVtoXoC. 

^^ It appears that at some time contemporary with, or not long before, the 
building of Antigonos' ship, the largest of Ptolemy's vessels was a nevreKai- 
beKTjpTjs ; i.e. he had stopped just short of where Demetrios got to before his 
death. Afterwards he built up to rpiaKovTripfis, whether they were used or 
not. See/.H. S. 1910, p. 209 seq. 


intend to mobilize his fleet and put to sea ; he had never 3'et 
looked on a drawn sword. But in the art of spinning diplo- 
matic webs he was a past master; and there were plent}- of 
others wBo would draw the sword in exchange for his gold. 

"Antigonos might be well enough among the clums}' rustics 
of Macedonia ; "^ it was time to show the world that he was 
But as a clumsy rus tic himself in th e hands ofthe subtleking 

^f Egypt. ^ """^ "^^ 

The workings of Egyptian diplomacy are hidden from us ; 
we only see the result. But the result stands out with 
startling clearness. Eo -ypt neither moved a man nor launc hed 

.a^ship ; but Antigonos found himself brought u p short, h is 
friends gone, his fleet paralysed, another set of drear}- wars 
on hand! Of all the checlcs whicKTiie haB suffered in his 
time, this must have seemed the worst ; the world ma}' very 
wtII have thought it checkmate. Ptolemy had read men 
a lesson in the power of gold ; could Antigonos recover him- 
self yet again, as he had done so often ? 

The first blow fell in a quarter where Antigonos may have 
thought himself more than secure. His trusted half-brother 

_^Krateros was dead, and his power and honours had been 
allov\'ed to devolve on his son Alexander, But Alexander 
had other thoughts than loyalty ; and his desire to be himselF 
a king made him an instrument read}" to Ptolemy's hand. 

Jn the winter of 253,2 he threw off his allegiance to Anti- 
gonos, and proclaimeH^himsL'lf king in his \icero_vaIt\-, Corinth 
and Euboea.^^ It was not a great kingdom ; but it was a 

^* Plul. Mor. 178 b; Philip II said the Macedonians were okmoxs 0iV« 
KCLi aypniKOvs Ka\ Trjv (TKiicprjii aKn<f)T]v Xe'yovrai. 

" The revolt; Trog. Pro/. 26. Alexander as an independent king; /. G. 
i'> 5) 371 c and 591 b. His kingdom included Corinth, Plut. Ara/. 17 and 18 ; 
and Euboea ; Suidas, Eiiphorion \ A. Wilhelm in 'E(^. 'A/jx- 1892, p. 127 
(decree of Eretria). On a possible coin of his, a didrachm of Karystos, 
J. Six in Num. Chron. 1S94, p. 299 ; but Head- 357, n. i does not think it 
can be so early. — The chronology is now certain within narrow limits. He 
had not revolted in summer 253, since Antigonos must then have had all his 
fleet ; and he was, as Beloch has shown, in revolt when Aratos took Sikyon, 
for Nikokles (against whom Antigonos had promised Aratos help) was 
Alexander's friend, so that the help which nearly came to him from Corinth 
must have been help from Alexander. I may add that the independence of 
Alexander at this time, and his friendship with Nikokles, are alike required 
to explain why Antigonos could not reach Nikokles, and why Aratos, who 
sought help against Nikokles from Antigonos and Ptolemy, did not apply to 

A a 2 





^astl^Mni20ilan.Li:iiie^ I t contained A ntigonos' two principal 
aval bases, Corinth and Chalkis ; and it deprived Antigonos 
f the best part of his fleet, for the revolt was timed of course 
tal<e place when the^squadrons of Chalkis and Corinjh 
ere laid up for the winter, Tliei;^ was no longer any 
question of the Egyptian sea- command being challenged?" 
The~tortresses, too, gripped Athens in their arms, and Alex-" 
ander forthwith attacked that town. It was now seen how 
wisely Antigonos had acted in keeping Piraeus and the Attic 
forts separate from Krateros' vicero3'alty ; for Herakleitos, 
their commander, remained loyal.^*^ Alexander secured tne 
aid of certain pirates, probabl}'' from Crete,"' who may have 
been subsidized by Egypt : but Herakleitos received the 
hearty co-operation, not only of Athens herself, but also of 
Argos and its tyrant Aristomachos ; and the two cities to- 
gether maintained the war against Alexander."^ Once more, 
anH for the last time, Antigonos' S3^stem of tyrants appeared 
fio be justif^ang its existence. 

But Ptolemy succeeded in a greater achievement even 
than this. It had become almost a basic fact in politics that 
~the^eleukid should_be friendly to Antigonos and hostile to 
Eg3^pt : and Antigonos in fact had a definite aUiance with 
Antiochos.'"^ But Antiochos, though preparing for war, was 
in desperate need of money ; and he may have been some- 
what tired of his wife Laodike's imperious nature. Ptolemy 
bought him outright for a 3^ounger wife and a huge sum in 
cash down. That was the essence of the transacdonj it was 

Alexander, though he was so near at hand. — (De Sanctis in Klio, 1909, p. i, 
has again argued that Nikokles was Antigonos' friend, but has no good 
reasons.) — If then Aratos took Sikyon in May 251 (see n. 50), Alexander's 
revolt, which must have occurred when the fleet was laid up, must be winter 
253/2 or winter 252/1. As I believe that the revolution in Alegalopolis was 
in 252 (n. 43), and that it is unlikely that Antigonos had his fleet all 252 and 
did nothing, I conclude that Alexander revolted in the winter or early spring 
of 253/2. 

38 Syll? 220 = /. G. ii, 5, 591 b. 

^"^ lb. The pirates came from Epilimnios, which seems unknown. 

^^ /. G. ii, 5, 371 c. The Athenians, while praising Aristomachos, speak 
of the co-operation of the Argives ; perhaps one of many signs that Aristo- 
machos' rule was popular. (See ch. 10, p. 280.) 

^^ Antiochos I even reckoned Antigonos I among his Trpoyoi^oi, perhaps as 
having ruled in part of his kingdom ; O. G. 1. 222, n. 10. (Unless it be a bit 
of royal ' common form '.) 


of coiirsf (jpfpntly vpilerl Antiochos repudiated Laodike 
on some unknown charge and wedded Berenike, Ptolemy's 
daughter ; as her dowry she brought with her such a great 
sum in money that she became known to history as (pepuo(l>6pos, 
the well-dowered.^" Laodike and her sons retired to Ephesos ; 
the relationship of Syria to Egypt became a close one ; and 
when Berenike bore Antiochos a son, the friendship of the 
two courts, and the cunsequent hostilit}- of AntiochOi5"tU 
Antigonos, seemed to be permanently assured. " 

Even lesser powers did not escape Ptolemy's far-reaching 
combinations. Bithynia, for instance, had been a consistent 
friend to Antigonos : but the new king, Ziaelas, had come 
to the throne in despite of his half-brothers, who were wards 
of Antigonos and Ptolemy jointly, and had therefore (what- 
ever the exact nature of the compromise arranged by the 
Herakleots) entered on his career in a spirit of opposition 
to both the great Powers. Such an attitude, of course, could 
not last ; Ziaelas had to favour one or the other ; and Ptolem}^, 
possibly by playing upon the natural dread of Antiochos 
which the Bithynian felt, possibly by helping the young king 
to pay his Gallic mercenaries, had known how to win liim to 
his side. Ziaelas, in an official letter written about this time, 
refers to Ptolemy as his 'friend and ally'.'^^ 

Ptolemy had indeed accomplished much. But fortune was 
doing even more for him than he had planned. 

It has been seen that in the dark days that followed the 
surrender of Athens, the philosopher Arkesilaos, true in this 
to the spirit of Plato's school, had, in his political detach- 
ment, kept alive the flame of patriotism, and something more. 
Some of those who surrounded him became passionate 
devotees of the freedom, not of this or, that city only, but of 
Hellas— of any Greek community that needed help. Among 
these were two exiles from Megalopolis, named Ekdemos 
and Demophanes. Their very names are uncertain, and 
variously given in the tradition ;^2 their exploits became 

*" Jerome on Dan. ii, 6. 

^' Letter of Ziaelas to the Koans, in reply to their request for oo-i/Xi'a for the 
Asklepieion ; R. Herzog, At/i. Mitt. 1905, p. 173; Zvra ijfifTfjwv (f)i\ov koX 

" See ch. 11, n. 65. — On the variants (Ekdemos, Ekdelos ; Demophanes, 


almost a legend. Born at Megalopolis, a cit}^ whose best 
Hays vvere^'^'before her, and whose sons were to add to the 
Greek roll of honour the names of Lydiades, Philopoimen, 
and Polybios, t hey belonged to a community which was the 
traditional friend uf Macedonia; possibly they had been 
banished because they had thought otherwise. .Whether at' 
Athens they made the acquaintance, as is generally supposed, 
of another pupil of Arkesilaos, Demetrios the Fair, and 
whether they may have accompanied him to Gyrene or not 
is entirely uncertain ; it is not likely that Demetrios was in 
Athens after 266, and it is very possible that Ekdemos and 
Demophanes were not there so soon. What is certain is 
that somewhere about this time, most probably m 252, they 
slew Aristodemos the tyrant and ' freed ' Megalopolis.'*^ 
Aristodemos was called 'the Good'; but it was always 
immaterial, to a philosophic Greek republican, whether an 
unconstitutional monarch was good or bad; he was to be 
iin for being unconstitutional. .It was an axiom with a 
Greek democrat, no less than with certain modern historians, 
that the very worst democracy was infinitely better than the 
very best 'tyranny' — a conventional view which neglects 
the uncomfortable fact that the tyranny of a democracy can 
be the worst in the world. This reflection, however, does 
•not affect Megalopolis, whose new dem ocratic govern ment 

Damophanes, Megalophanes), see Beloch 3, i, 635, n. 2. I have kept 
Polybios' forms in the text, with von Arnim in P. IV. 1905, s.v. Ekdemos, 
though both Niese and Beloch prefer Ekdelos. — Is it an accident that both 
names are compounded of -demos ? 

" Plutarch, PJiilop. i and Polyb. 10, 22, 2 both give their exploits in order 
thus : (i) Megalopolis, (2) Sikyon, (3) Cyrene. Neither passage alone, I admit, 
could settle the chronology, and Beloch transposes (2) and (i). But if the 
two passages be compared, it appears that they must have a common source, 
and that common source some way back, for the facts agree while the 
language differs ; and I am not prepared to say that this common and early 
source was wrong. Consequently Megalopolis comes first. And as the revo- 
lution there involved the overthrow of a friend of Antigonos', I take it that it 
was stimulated by Alexander's example. It has to fall, then, between 
Alexander's revolt in winter 253/2 (see n. 35) and the liberation of Sikyon in 
May 251 (see n. 50); i.e. in 252. We cannot suppose that it fell befo7-e 
Alexander's revolt, i.e. in 253, when Antigonos at the height of his power 
was issuing his challenge to Egypt. — The date 252 for the revolution at 
Megalopolis explains, both why Aristodemos does not appear in the war 
against Alexander, and why Antigonos took no steps against Megalopolis ; 
he could no longer reach it. 


ju stified its existence. It app ears that the Arkadian League 
was revived for a few years, with Megalopohs at its head;^* 
for the fall of Aristodemos had freed the other towns whicl 
he ruled. It was a blow to Antigonos^ witli whom Megalo^j"^ 
_£olisno\v ceased to be in direct relations ; and it prevented! 
him from securing the assistance of Arkadia in conjunction, 
with that of Argos for the war against^Alexander. But to 
_the actual balance of power in the irnTade lit tle I 
difference; for the new league of necessity too k up an atti- l\ 
tude of opposition to Sparta.^"' ' 

But, for Antigonos, worse was yet to come. It is almost 
a commonplace that a great idea is apt to strike more than 
one person at the same time ; and the spirit of liberty was 
stirring in other places beside the classroom of Arkesilaos, 
To speak of it as the ghost of Grecian libert}' rising from 
its tomb is absurd. The Greek love for freedom had never 
died, had never even slept, as the ceaseless struggles here 
recorded sufficiently show. What differentiated the new 
movement from its various predecessors was simply- this, 
that, up to a certain point, it w as successful. It owed its -^ / 
success to a number of reasons ; an improved form of political 
organization was only one of them. But th e principal cause " 
was a man. >^ . 

Of all the opponents whom Antigonos enc ountered in 
his" time, Aratos 6t •STkyofH^Mva^-fer-'ana away t he most , 
^dangerous ; and Antigonos met him veiy Ikle in life. A ratos J/^" 
was not a great man ; he was not even a good man. No 
one has ever made of him more than haJJLa Jiero ; his faults 

" For this revived Arkadian League see Niese, Hennes, 34, 542 ; Beloch 
3, 2, 441 seq. It seems to me that there is enough to establish it even inde- 
pendently of the question of the date of >>//.- 106, which has recently been 
again dated to the fourth century by H. von Gaertringen, Ath. Mitt. 36, 349, 
on fresh evidence. — How the synoikismos of Orchomenos and Euaimou, 
which may fall somewhere about the middle of the century (F. Solmsen in 
Rhein. Miis. 1910, p. 321), fits in, is quite obscure. 

^'■' See Beloch, I.e., on the defeat by this league of a Spartan army at 

" For Aratos ; Plutarch's Life, and Polyb. 2, 43 seq. ; both based on 
Aratos' memoirs, both also using Phylarchos. For the character of these 
sources see generally App. i. In Aratos' memoirs we have to allow, not only 
for vehement anti-Macedonian bias, but also for strong personal colouring; 
they were in fact Aratos' apology for his life (cf. Wilamowitz, Gr. Lit. 
1 171. — The fullest modern account is still that of Freeman, History 0/ 

'''- L 


were too glaring-.. As statesm an, politiciaiyinb -igner, he was 
no doubt supremely able ; the influence which he came to 
wield over the Achaean League 'was~amazing ; his successes 
were great, and hv was absolutely incorruptible. He planned 
in his time a number of night att'ad^sand^suf prises that were 
capably and courageously carried through. There, from the 
material point of view, Aratos ends. It is not necessary to 
reproach him with his failures in the field ; it was the fault 
of the polity under which he lived that he could not hold 
the office of president of the League, for which he was the 
obvious person, without being at the same time commander- 
in-chief, for which post he had every possible disqualification. 
We are bound to believe that he was a personal coward in 
battle ; for the only alternative is that he was a traitor, and 
that seems out of the question. If Ant igonos had once 
allowed the end to justify the means, Aratos did it whenever 
he chose. To hire assassins against a ' tyrant ' was no doubt 
considered fair play by his contemporaries ; but none were 
found to justify such acts as his attack on Athens in a time- 
of profound peace, or to believe his excuse, that a subordinate 
had acted without orders. He was too jealous to allow any 
other prominent man at his side ; no means were too low to 
uQdermine or counter the influence of a rival. ^' His relations 
with Lydiades, who was able and honest, form one of the 
most pitifully mean chapters of history ; and there is no 
need here to relate how at the end he stulti fied h is whole 
life's work from jealousy and terror, nf KIp'^^t'^"^? -^f Sparta, 
an infinitely greater and nobler man than himself. 

It may then well be asked, what it was that mad e Ara tos 
so dangerous, and why he was such a force in his world. 
The answer is not far to seek. At the outset of his career, 
Aratos was a man utterly possessed by one great passion ; 

and a man so possessed is perhaprnlTE! mus t fwm rdable 

force known, ^anmbal himself did not hate _R(MSj52oJ^~ 
thoroughly than Ar atos hated~ a 'tyrant'. His whole being 

Federal Government, i86l (ed. J. B. Bury, 1S93). It should not be neces- 
sary to-day to emphasize the partisan character of this great work ; in parts 
it is a political pamphlet. 

*^ See the story of how Argos became included in the League; Plut. ^ra^. 
35, Freeman, Federal Gover?t/nent, 331-4. 


was filled with a single thought: that thr P rlnoouiitJL liiULf 
be freed, and that he must free it.*^ It was with the stupendous 
driving power " Of thi^ Ideu bdiiiiil llilli that he went forward 
and against an idea the swords of Gallic mercenaries an 
drawn in vain.*^ 

It is in the 3'ear 252/1, soon after the revolt of Alexander 
and the liberation of Megalopolis, that Aratos first appears 
on the scene.^'' Sikyon had for many years been ruled by 
tyrants, but (as already narrated) a change had come about 
the time of the war with Pyrrhos, when for a short inter\'al 
the city had been a democracy under the guidance of two 
leading citizens, Timokleidas and Aratos' father Kleinias. 
Aratos was born in 271, the year after Pyrrhos' death. Timo- 
kleidas died, and in the course of the year 264, perhaps as 
a consequence of the defeat and death of Areus of Sparta, 
one Abantidas slew Kleinias and made himself tyrant of the 
city. The little Aratos, however, then seven years old, 
escaped through the kindness of Abantidas' sister, and was 
sent to Argos ; Abantidas could not reach him there under 
the jtrong rule of Antigonos' friend Aristomachos, and tliere 
he gre\\'To'lTiahho5'd;n;onTward" Aristomachos in after years 
by trying to assassinate him.-'' Abantidas remained in power 
till the general ferment of the year 252, when two men, 
Deinias, probably the historian, - and one Aristoteles, a philo- 

*^ Polyb. 2, 43, 7-8 ; and Aratos' whole career. 

*^ Wilamowitz, Afi/i_i^onos, 218, ' Geister bannt man nicht mit keltischen 

'"" Chronology. — Polybios 2, 43 makes Sikyon join the League in 251/50; 
its liberation is therefore generally put in May 251. Ferguson argues for 
May 252 {J.H.S. 1910, p. 197, n. 38), but I do not find his argument con- 
vincing. Plutarch shows that Sikyon joined the League before Aratos got 
his twenty-five talents {Afat. 1 1 ), and Aratos' voyage to Egypt is much later ; 
he was only recently home when Antigonos was back in Corinth in 247 
{Atat. 15). There seems no reason to depart from the accepted belief, which 
accords with Plutarch, that Aratos joined Sikyon to the League almost 
immediately after its liberation. — Polybios also fixes Aratos' first generalship 
to 245, and makes him twenty-six at the time (born in 271). Beloch (3, 2, 
179) says Polybios must be mistaken, as no one could be strategos under 
thirty. But Beloch's instances of a thirty-year limit (for lesser ofifices) belong 
to a much later period ; and I cannot believe that Polybios, with Aratos' 
memoirs before him, made a mistake as to his age. 

°' As Aristomachos was Antigonos' friend, Abantidas was therefore prob- 
ably not. — Sec Plut. Afnt. 25. 

" Susemihl i, 633, and Beloch 3, i, 634, identify this Deinias with the 
historian. In P. fF., ' Deinias,' 7 (Schwartz) and 8(Natorp), they are separated. 


sopher — perhaps another of Arkesilaos' friends, for he is 
called a dialectician — rose against him and slew him. They 
could not, however, free the cit}^ for Paseas, Abantidas' father, 
succeeded in grasping the tyranny for himself, which means 
that he secured the allegiance of Abantidas' mercenaries. 
One Nikokles, however, managed to slay Paseas by guile, 
and ruled in his stead. He ruled badly, and was nearly 
turned out by Antigonos' friends the Aetolians ; " but he 
survived the attack, whatever it was, having strengthened 
himself by securing the friendship or alliance of Alexander 
of Corinth.^* 

Meanwhile Aratos had grown up in Argos into a capable 
and athletic youth, and his own sense and his fathers reputa- 
tion caused the Sikyonian exiles, who had gathered at Argos, 
to look to him as their leader. The bloodshed at Sikyon 
turned their thoughts toward action, and Aratos applied for 
help both to Antigonos and Ptolemy, Ptolemy, of course, 
was not going to act against a friend of Alexander's. Aratos 
says that Antigonos promised help and did not send it ; but 
it is obvious, both that Antigonos had no means of reaching 
Sikyon hirnseii^.AniL.^^so"that he would have been glad 
enough, if he could, to have put down Nikokles, the friend 
of Alexander. As, however, Nikokles only ruled for a short 
time,^^ it is more than likely that the Aetolian assault upon 
him, whatever it was, was Antigonos' method of redeeming 
his promise, the only w^ay in which he could do so. 

Aratos thereon resolved to put down Nikokles himself; 
his confidants were another Aristomachos,^*^ a Sikyonian 
exile, and the famous friends .Ekdemos and Demophanes, 
who came from Megalopolis to aid the new undertaicmg.'' 
The picturesque narrative of the night surprise of Sikyon 
in May 251 may be read in the pages of Plutarch ; how 
Aratos threw Nikokles' spies off their guard by an ostenta- 

^^ Plut. AraL 4. I do not know how far iiri^ov'Kevoij.evrji/ is meant to go. 

" See n. 35. 

^^ It is not clear to me that Plut. Arai. 4 means that Nikokles only ruled 
four months altogether, as is generally supposed. 

^® A statue base bearing his name, 'Apt(r7-o/xa;^oj luxrw^pov ^iKvavios, has 
been found at Delphi (Pomtow, B.Ph. IV. 1909, 286). 

" Plut. Philop. I ; Polyb. 10, 22, 2. Plut. Arat. 5 mentions Ekdemos 


tioLis devotion to eating and drinking ; how the friends got 
the fortifications of Sikyon measured, and had scahng-ladders 
openly prepared by one of the exiles, a professed ladder- 
maker; how they hired some brigands, the 'arch-klepht' 
Xenophilos and his band ; how on the appointed night they 
came up to the walls through a market garden, having locked 
the gardener in his house but failed to catch his dogs, which 
were small and quarrelsome and would not make friends ; 
how the little dogs nearly wrecked the whole undertaking, 
which was saved by Aratos' spirit ; how Mnasitheos and 
Ekdemos were first over the wall, and Aratos secured the 
whole of the tyrant's mercenaries as the}' slept ; and how at 
dawn, as the citizens were clustering together, ignorant and 
in wonder of what had happened, on their ears fell the 
startling cry of the herald ^' Ar atos, son of Kleinias, calls his 
countrymen to their freedom. Tfie tyrant's house was fired 
and plundered, the sight of the flames nearly bringing Alex- 
ander's men from Corinth down upon them ; but no blood 
was spilt, even Nikokles himself escaping. Aratos recalled 
all the Sikyonian exiles, whether banished by Nikokles or 
by earlier tyrants ; and, seeing the difficulties of the time, he 
took the all-important step of finding support for Sikyon b}' 
uniting it, a Dorian city, to the league of the ten towns of 
Achaea, a league whose constitution he is said to have 
admired greatl}*.^" 

Aratos had shown his miality ; nor was he likely to stop 
here. His proceedings attBTslllllt; were of course in no 
sense aimed at Antigonos ; they were directed merely to 
the freeing of the Peloponnese. So far as he had a particular 
opponent, that opponent was Alexander of Corinth, who had 
been a friend of Nikokles, and was Antigonos' enemy. An}' 
opponent of Alexander was of use to Antigonos ; and it was 
probably at this time that Antigonos sent Aratos a present 
of twenty-five talents, of which the Sikyonian made honour- 

*• Polyb. 2, 43, 3. — The worthless story that he joined Sikyon to the 
Achaean League because it was (pdovovfiivqv in 'Apnyofov (Plut. Ariit. 9) is 
a mere afterthought of Aratos' own, and is refuted by his subsequent accept- 
ance of twenty-five talents from Antigonos (see next note) ; it was quite uncer- 
tain at this time, to Antigonos, whether Aratos, who had just overthrown an 
enemy of his, was not going to be his friend. 


able use in freeing prisoners and aiding destitute citizens.'^'' 
Whether as a consequence of this, or merely in pu rsuit 
of his own ideas, Aratos' next move was an attempt on 
Corinth, which failed ; bu t AJpyandpr wa?; plarmp d and 
managed to secure an alliance with the Achaeans."^" This 
must have taken place shortl}^ after the accession of Sikyon 
to the Achaean League ; and, to be just to Aratos, the alliance, 
at this time, can have been none of his doing; he had not 
yet the conduct of the affairs of the League, unofficially or 
otherwise. Sojar it had looked to be an open question, to 
any one^ n^t well acqiiairife'd with--Arat05,"w1lelh"eFAnfigonos 
might not turn his exploits to his own advantage; but the 

f'liance between Alexander and the League definitely ranged 
le League, and Aratos as a member of it, on the side of 
ntigonos' avowed eneni}^, Ptolemy. ~^ 

Meanwhile the war between Andgonos and Alexander 
continued its dreary progress. An Athenian decree in honour 
of Aristomachos of Argos tells that Alexander offered the 
latter favourable terms to detach him from the alliance, but 
the ' tyrant ' 103'ally refused to make peace apart from his 
allies, and even advanced the latter money ;*^^ another decree 
show^s that Herakleitos successfully defended Salamis from 
attack.*"'- Alex ander, however, seems to have been too strong 
for the allies, and at some tTrne whTcli canE^ Zbe" exactly 
ascertained compelled Argos and Athens to make peace and 
recognize him in his kingship.*^'"' He still, of course, rema ined 
in a state of war with Antigonos. 
"^ It is difficult to make out what Antigonos was doing in 

this war.*'^ He was not doing nothing ; and indeed Polybios 

^' See HoUeaux, Hermes, 1 906, p. 475. It is not possible to say whether 
Aratos' attack on Alexander, referred to out of place in Pkit. Arat. 18, 
preceded or followed Antigonos' gift. But the two things must be connected ; 
Antigonos' aim was Alexander, and not, as Holleaux thinks, Sikyon. 

<=" Plut. Arat. 18. " /. G. ii. 5, 371 c. 

" SyllP- 220. 

•'^ This follows from /. 6^. ii, 5, 371 c. Ferguson {Priests, 166) dated this 
decree 250/49 or 249/8 ; but Kolbe {A rc/ionten, 61} seems right in saying 
that nothing in the decree shows that Alexander was yet alive. The decree 
then cannot help us as to when the war ended ; but it can hardly have lasted 
longer than 249, because of Alexander's death, on which see ch. 13. n. 5. 

" Ferguson {Athens, p. 193) conjectures that Antigonos was occupied in 
resisting Egypt's reconquest of the Cyclades. But he had lost all the best of 
his fleet. 


expressly refers to the manifold activities of these later years 
of his life.''' There was no question of Aristomachos and 
Athens being left unsupported ; for Herakleitos was Anti- 
gonos' general in command, and no doubt properly furnished 

with troops. ^\\ t A nti g^"^'=' himc<a lf w >c ft n Qr A o:f»a